Monique Ryan
Kooyong · Independent · Australia
“I second this motion and commend the member for Curtin's motion to refer the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 to the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs. This should not be a controversial request.”
“What about the clinicians, the researchers, the public health experts and the community organisations who have spent years documenting the devastating impact of gambling addiction? Some of them have been given days to review this complex legislation and provide feedback on it to a very limited extent.”
“After this sort of delay, the government has no excuses for not getting this legislation right. But it's rushing to introduce legislation that has been denied input from the public.”
“They're special relationships, the glue that holds us together. For Emily, Matt and Lucy, Noah and Maia, Millie and Rory—I know you share those special relationships and I know that they'll continue. I know that Rich knew that too. Parkrun is something we all do together. It's really symbolic of Rich.”
“We were fortunate to have people in our lives who gave us a sense of what was possible—doctors, engineers, teachers and scientists. We learnt the importance and the wonder of learning and science. There was always plenty of sport. We participated in everything, but particularly footy.”
“The government has not responded to that recommendation appropriately. Its proposals fall well short of that. There are ongoing and serious questions about the extent to which this legislation will provide any support or any protections for children and for vulnerable Australians.”
The complete record
Every one of 938 lines we hold for Monique Ryan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 19.
“The government's bill specifies that statutory reviews must consider whether the legislation is effective in providing reasonable certainty to individuals about the use of protected genetic information in relation to contracts of life insurance and whether these provisions have any unintended consequences. There is, in fact, good reason to suspect that future reviews will identify disadvantage arising from the failure of this bill to offer retrospective application. As it stands, people who have already had penalties, loadings, exclusions or discriminatory terms imposed upon them by life insurers will continue to face discrimination unless they seek to negotiate new coverage. The implications of this inequity are going to have to be closely monitored.”
“by leave—I move the amendment circulated in my name: (1) Schedule 1, item 3, page 10 (line 18), omit "each fifth anniversary", substitute "each third anniversary". I have moved this amendment to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This important bill recognises that we have to remove disincentives for people who want to access life-saving genetic testing. The amendment that I am moving strengthens that intention by requiring the minister to commence and complete the statutory review of this legislation sooner than the government currently proposes—in fact, as soon as is practicable after three years, rather than five.”
“Most of its leaders so lack curiosity around the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise by those events.' Australians deserve better. They deserve a parliament that governs with vision, with imagination and with courage. They deserve a country that gets a fair share on its extraordinary natural mineral, oil and gas deposits. So I ask the government to take action on this issue as a matter of urgency for all Australians, to give us our fair share.”
“Introducing a fair-share levy would realise the original intention of the PRRT. As the name suggests, a fair-share levy would finally give Australians a fair share of our national resources. Australians do want their fair share. A whopping 87 per cent agree or strongly agree that Australians deserve a better return from the sale of our gas exports. Three per cent of people disagree; who those people are escapes me. With another rate rise announced just last week and with fuel prices doubling in some places across the country, we can't ask Australians to foot the bill again while big gas companies are pocketing yet another enormous payday. Australians deserve their fair share on gas. As Donald Horne said, and I've abbreviated his quote: 'Australia is a lucky country, run mainly by people who share its luck.”
“We could have used that revenue to completely relieve all young Australians of HECS debts, or we could have used it to increase the supply of Australian housing. If the government had placed a fair-share levy into the legislation before the start of the recent conflict in Iran, government revenue would have increased in the last four weeks by $1.6 billion. We could have raised more revenue in the last four weeks than we did last year from the PRRT. Claims by the gas industry that fairer taxation will drive exporters and buyers away and chill investment ignore a basic economic reality: a tax on supernormal profits affects producers, not our foreign trading partners. And, under the fair-share levy, the government would share in investment costs as well as upside, meaning that there shouldn't be any lack of investment incentive or certainty.”
“This could apply only when profits exceeded a defined threshold, and it could be limited to a period in which prices are unusually high due to these external price shocks. As a more permanent measure, we could consider the Superpower Institute's fair-share levy, a two-way tax on the net cash flows from the extraction, processing and sale of Australian gas. This could completely replace the PRRT. A fair-share levy would result in Australians sharing in a 50 per cent share of fossil fuel profits, which would be a marked improvement from the 18 per cent we share in now. Had the government legislated the fair-share levy at the start of the Russian-Ukrainian war, Australia could have raised $27 billion—nearly 14 times as much as we have accumulated in that time from the PRRT.”
“Essentially, the gas companies can use creative accounting—approaches which remain legal under our poorly designed resource rent tax—to make it look like they are not making superprofits even while they export vast quantities of Australian gas at enormous value. We have tried to fix the PRRT. The government continues to point to changes it made in 2023 as having delivered a fairer return to the Australian community. But because uplifted deductions continue to suppress taxable profit, those changes delivered only $1.5 billion to our economy in 2023-24. Now more than ever, it is time for the government to act in the national interest and properly tax our gas exports. We could start by urgently implementing a targeted windfall tax on supernormal profits generated from global crises such as wars.”
“The PRRT allows capital expenses, like the enormous costs of offshore equipment and infrastructure, to be immediately deductible expenditure—in other words, a tax write-off. That means that companies can deduct massive project costs from their PRRT liability. And, if the expenses exceed revenue, the difference can be carried forward into future years. Many projects can accumulate deductions for years, sometimes decades, and can continue to report no taxable superprofits for PRRT purposes. As the Commonwealth Treasury put it in 2016, companies can defer the payment of PRRT indefinitely. There is a reason why the ATO has labelled the oil and gas industry systemic nonpayers of tax.”
“The reality is that we collect less from the PRRT than we do from the beer excise and less from the PRRT than we collect from students in the repayment of their HECS, and WA drivers pay more in rego than west coast gas companies pay in royalties. Plainly, the PRRT is broken. It was designed to place a 40 per cent tax on the excess profits from the exploration and extraction of oil and gas, but longstanding loopholes, generous uplift deductions and an overly complex design mean that the PRRT is not working for us. The formula is designed in a way that allows companies to understate the value of gas before liquefaction—in other words, to minimise their taxable amount while overstating the value created by the liquification process, which is then not taxed. Deductions are another major problem.”
“Energy markets are being impacted globally, and, at a time when energy and gas prices are rising domestically, it would be a profound shame were we to let Australians down again. At the heart of this problem is the petroleum resource rent tax, the PRRT. When the parliament legislated the PRRT in 1988, the aim was to ensure that all Australians would enjoy a fair share of our collective wealth—a fair share of our national luck. The PRRT is targeted at economic rent—in other words, profits above the level reasonably required to maintain investment returns. But, instead, the PRRT allows companies to sell Australian gas with minimal tax while pocketing billions in public subsidies.”
“Companies exporting LNG reportedly made almost $100 billion in windfall profits in the three years following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Australian gas should belong to us all. Our government should have secured a significant return from that gas for all Australians, but instead those profits flowed to foreign investors and multinational companies like Santos, like Shell, like INPEX. Now, as we're confronted with another global energy crisis, we cannot let history repeat. Donald Trump's war with Iran has quickly escalated into a regional conflict. Qatar usually produces 20 per cent of the world's LNG, but some of its gas fields have been so significantly damaged during this conflict that QatarEnergy has had to declare force majeure on its long-term contracts, meaning that that could affect international supply for up to five years.”
“The irony of Australia's nickname 'the lucky country' is more pronounced now than when Donald Horne coined that phrase more than 60 years ago. Australia is home to some of the most valuable natural resources and critical minerals on earth. We're one of the greatest and largest gas producers on the planet. The means for economic strength and prosperity lie beneath our soil and our seas. Yet, for all of that abundance, very little wealth from our extraordinary natural mineral and fossil fuel resources flows back to Australian people. We saw that as recently as 2022, when the war in Ukraine began. Energy prices, including gas prices, surged. Windfall gains flowed into the pockets of gas companies both here and overseas.”
“I'm hearing from providers like Learning for Life, in Kew, and Abacus, in Hastings, that support for children in the NDIS early childhood pathway is decreasing and that they do not have a clear pathway for transition into the Thriving Kids program. I believe in the promise of Thriving Kids, but lack of timelines and lack of clarity regarding its rollout are creating anxiety for parents and threatening the financial viability of providers. I'm calling on the responsible ministers to give constituents and their carers greater clarity and confidence in Thriving Kids, in that rollout and in the government's full commitment to the NDIS.”
“In 2024, the government passed legislation promising to get the NDIS back on track, but what was sold as a crackdown on fraud has instead clamped down heavily on participants. Clients, advocates and lawyers have reported that new support definitions, funding caps, travel billing restrictions, narrower review pathways and changes to funding periods have reduced participant support. As a result, almost one-third of NDIS participants whose packages have been reassessed since May 2025 have had their support reduced and there is huge anxiety in the disability community about the support needs assessment tool, which is due to be rolled out in mid 2026.”
“It will fund safer transport and emergency accommodation, planning to help victims leave violence and stay safe, and community playgroups where mothers and babies can connect with elders, receive parenting support and be linked into early health and healing. The plan also includes outreach programs for men and boys, because ending violence means changing behaviour, not only managing its consequences. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have been steadfast for decades in their advocacy for a plan like this. During that time they have buried daughters and sisters while they have worked and called for action. They deserve a parliament that is equally as steadfast in its response. So I commend this motion to the chamber.”
“So the gap between policy aspiration and lived reality continues to affect women and children in the community at a state and federal level. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have consistently called for action through the Senate inquiry into missing and murdered First Nations Women and Children and, more recently, through the rapid review of prevention approaches. This plan is a long-awaited response to eight recommendations from that former inquiry and 12 from the latter, and it provides, for the first time, a genuine framework to address our obligations under the National Agreement on Closing the Gap—specifically, target 13 on family violence and target 12 on out-of-home care. The plan will fund mobile teams in remote areas after violent incidents.”
“Victoria's royal commission found that lack of funding and short-term funding cycles was undermining efforts for prevention and early intervention, and that insufficient investment in evaluation meant that it was impossible to evaluate target resources appropriately. That finding is now a decade old, but the structural problem it identified has not been resolved. The Victorian Aboriginal Child and Community Agency has documented that Aboriginal women and children who are fleeing violence often don't feel culturally safe when they engage with mainstream providers. They're often forced to retell their stories across multiple services, and on occasion they have experienced discrimination when seeking emergency accommodation.”
“Funding to ACCOs for family violence and sexual assault service delivery has increased tenfold since 2017-18 and Aboriginal access points operated by organisations like VACCA and the Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative have opened in multiple sites. But these organisations have consistently raised concerns about the lack of ongoing funding for community prevention projects, the competitive process by which funding is administered and the need to reapply for funding every year—with successful projects often funded only as pilots rather than as ongoing programs. You cannot build a sustained response to intergenerational trauma on annual grant rounds.”
“In Victoria, the state that I represent, in the year to March 2025, family incidents involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people increased by almost 15 per cent against an overall Victorian family violence figure that itself hit a record high. In Victoria, family violence is the single biggest driver of First Nations child removal; 88 per cent of First Nations children in home care have experienced family violence. That figure is an indictment on decades of policy failure and its intergenerational cost. Victoria is one of only two Australian jurisdictions with an Aboriginal-specific strategy on ending family violence.”
“I rise to support this motion, and I thank the member for Lingiari for the opportunity to do so. 'Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices' is Australia's first standalone national plan for ending family, domestic and sexual violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children, developed in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It provides $218 million in new funding for a national network of up to 40 Aboriginal community controlled organisations to deliver community led specialist support services. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are seven times more likely to be victims of intimate partner homicide. They're 27 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family violence—41 times in regional and very remote communities.”
“In closing, I move amendments (1) to (3) circulated in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that: (a) genetic testing and genomic research are essential to improving prevention, care and treatment and reducing Australia's chronic disease burden; (b) Australia has made remarkable progress on carrier and newborn reproductive genetic testing; (c) genomic sequencing technology means that conditions can be easily added to a screening panel without significant increases in test costs; (d) world-leading Australian medical research has demonstrated that such programs have real-world feasibility and demonstrable cost-effectiveness; and (e) pathology items 73451 and 73452, covering genetic carrier testing for spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis and fragile X syndrome, were welcome inclusions to the Medicare Benefits Schedule in November 2023; (2) calls upon the Government to heed expert calls to expand the Medical Benefits Schedule to: (a) develop, support, and fund population programs for carrier testing and genomic screening; and (b) identify couples and individuals at high risk of medically actionable conditions before conception or disease onset; and (3) further notes that the above measures, along with restrictions on the use of genetic testing by the insurance industry contained in this bill, will encourage a greater uptake of genetic testing.”
“By removing a key structural barrier to its implementation, this legislation reinforces the role of genetic information as a tool for empowerment to support earlier action, better planning and improved health outcomes across the lifespan. Given its importance, we should, as a nation with world-leading medical care and an outstanding research sector, be looking to more actively embrace new technologies in genetic diagnosis, and we should be providing their benefit to all Australians.”
“Within a few years, babies found to have Batten disease on newborn screening could well be effectively cured within a few weeks with a single dose of gene therapy. All such treatments work best when they're given early. With proactive genetic diagnostics, we could be providing the very earliest possible access to such life-saving interventions for all Australian children. As genetics increases its influence upon modern health care, policy changes like this one play a critical role in ensuring that scientific progress, particularly that made by world-leading Australian medical researchers, translates immediately and effectively into meaningful clinical benefit. Genetic testing is increasingly incorporated into everyday health care in Australia.”
“When the treatment was no longer available in Italy, Tom's parents, Kate and Antony, secured access for the medication in Melbourne. They had to fight for it. It wasn't, at the time, funded or approved here, but they prevailed. I can attest to the force of their natures in fighting for the wellbeing of their son at that time. It's now the case that all children with Batten disease in Victoria can access that treatment. It has radically changed their outcome and it has extended their life expectancy. Newborn screening for Batten disease wasn't feasible when Tom was born, but it is now, and it would transform the lives of babies born with this and similar neurological and other conditions.”
“World-leading Australian medical research and clinical programs have demonstrated that these sorts of programs have real-world flexibility, and they are demonstrably cost effective. I'd like to mention a former patient of mine who is now a constituent. Tom Strahan has Batten disease. It's a rare disorder which manifests with balance problems and seizures in early childhood. It used to be invariably fatal in childhood. After Tom was diagnosed at age 2, his parents found an enzyme replacement therapy trial in Italy and, with great effort and great resourcefulness, managed to get Tom onto that experimental treatment. That medication, Brineura, proved able to slow cognitive and motor decline in Batten disease, unexpectedly, by 80 per cent.”
“In 2023, carrier screening for cystic fibrosis, spinal muscular atrophy and fragile X syndrome was finally included under the MBS after decades of work by tired researchers like me. Since that time, there has been huge uptake of this three-disease screen. In 2025, the screen was accessed by more than 123,000 of the 300,000 couples who are having babies in Australia. We should be developing, supporting and funding additional population programs for carrier testing and genetic screening, we should expand support under the MBS, and we should fund the genetic counselling and education required to support those programs so that Australians can make informed decisions about screening and so that they can be supported to navigate unexpected results.”
“That study targeted high-risk, medically actionable conditions in which effective interventions could manage risk and prevent disease. Those conditions in that study were hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome and familial hypercholesterolemia. A landmark study recently published in the Lancet identified significant productivity gains from the implementation of targeted, population based genomic screening. There have been recent extraordinary advances in genomic-sequencing technology, which means that other conditions could easily be added to screening panels without a significant increase in test cost. But, for the moment, in this country, larger gene panels remain user pays, and that creates inequitable access to them.”
“I bring to the House's attention the remarkable recent progress on carrier and newborn genetic testing in Australia. Research studies like Mackenzie's Mission, which investigated ways to deliver a large-scale, more-than-1000-gene national reproductive genetic carrier screening program, found that such testing is generally well-received, it is widely adopted and it is cost effective. Mackenzie's Mission should be the basis for the design and the delivery of a national reproductive genetic carrier screening program, which should be available to all Australians who are considering having children. I also bring to the House's attention the DNA Screen program, which represented a world-first initiative to increase the prevention and early detection of cancer and heart disease in adults through population DNA screening.”
“The bill has been a very long time coming, and I acknowledge the tireless work of the advocates who have pushed for it, particularly Dr Jane Tiller from the Public Health Genomics Program at Monash University, who has advocated for this legislation for years and whose work on a sentinel study of the life insurance moratorium found it inadequate to address and prevent genetic discrimination in life insurance. As a doctor and a medical researcher—and possibly the only person ever lucky enough to hold a seat in this House, who has actually identified new genes and who has actually described new genetic diseases—I'm uniquely placed to attest to the importance of genetic testing as an invaluable tool in the prevention, early detection and treatment of serious diseases.”
“I call on the Treasurer to ensure that that happens, and I foreshadow here careful examination of those regulations as they're developed to ensure that this occurs. I ask the government to review these regulations and the impact of this legislation in this very rapidly moving field after three years, not five as is currently foreshadowed in this bill. Despite these concerns, there is broad consensus about the bill from advocacy, research and peak bodies, as well as across the superannuation and insurance industry.”
“We need to ensure that life insurance remains affordable for all Australians. The government must ensure that the impacts of this legislation on the cost of life insurance are closely considered in its statutory review of this legislation. It's particularly important that life insurance companies do not infer genetic test results based on other data points, for example, information about other aspects of an individual's medical care, such as risk surveillance activities, the medications that they're prescribed, their participation in preventative healthcare measures, their involvement in clinical trials and other direct methods. These protections have to be enshrined in the regulations that accompany this bill.”
“They've possibly already been paying higher premiums for years, and they'll now be faced with the choice of either extending an unfavourable deal or negotiating new coverage on possibly poorer terms because they're older. It's also worth noting that those people who have applications in progress now are not protected from adverse decisions until the bill commences six months after it receives royal assent. It's my belief that the government should not abandon those who have already been subjected to the discriminatory practices that this legislation should prevent in the future. The government also has to be mindful that life insurance is a pooled arrangement. While risk is shared across millions of people, an increase in claims because of this legislation could well have pricing impacts.”
“Sadly, we can't protect all Australians from the health impacts of such scenarios. I well remember diagnosing a child with juvenile Huntington's disease, a heartbreakingly sad condition, which led to the inevitable cascade diagnosis of numerous other family members. That was a horribly difficult experience for that family to have to go through. It is disappointing, though, that this legislation does not apply retrospectively. The bill will apply only to existing life insurance contracts when those contracts are varied, reinstated or extended, but not to automatic contract extensions. While it may have very significant benefits for those people who are yet to obtain life insurance coverage, those who've already had penalties or other discriminatory terms imposed by life insurers will still be discriminated against.”
“The bill will operate by regulation, ensuring that the legislation can remain effective, even in the face of very rapidly evolving genetic testing technologies, and individuals can consent to use of their genetic information in underwriting so long as it does not disadvantage them. I'm also pleased that the bill protects the rights of genetic relatives. A person doesn't require the consent of their relatives to undertake genetic testing, but, in the absence of adequate legal protections, a young person's ability to obtain life insurance could well be compromised by decisions made by relatives that they've never actually met. It's absolutely vital that, as legislators, we protect all individuals from the possible downstream economic and personal effects of the testing of a relative as best we can.”
“Sector research released in 2021 indicated that about 10 per cent of individuals who had disclosed genetic test results had their insurance cover offered on less favourable terms or declined, despite the life insurance industry introducing a mandatory standard in 2019 which theoretically restricted the use of predictive genetic test results in their underwriting. Individuals should be able to receive optimal health care without the fear that it could compromise their ability to obtain life insurance cover on reasonable terms. That's why I support these reforms, which will remove that powerful disincentive and which will encourage more Australians to benefit from potentially life-changing genetic testing. For many Australians, that legislation will be transformative.”
“But, for decades, many Australians have deferred or declined genetic testing because of their very reasonable fears that discrimination will be applied when they attempt to obtain life insurance. In a 2019 study of nearly 1,500 Australians, more than 80 per cent expressed significant concern about potential insurance discrimination based on their genetic data. Another Australian study found that the proportion of participants who declined genetic testing more than doubled when they were informed of its potential impact upon their insurance eligibility. Those fears were reasonable.”
“Early identification of genetic risk also reduces the need for late stage interventions, and it will decrease hospital admissions. Genetic testing can also inform treatment of those people who've already been diagnosed with health conditions by predicting their response to medications, immunotherapies and other forms of treatment. Pharmacogenomics is increasingly improving targeting and the cost-effectiveness of prescribing. It's important to note that de-identified, de-aggregated genetic data is valuable input for scientific and medical research. It can be used to identify vulnerable populations, to contribute to workforce planning and to guide cost allocation in health.”
“Individuals at risk of hereditary conditions, like inherited cancer syndromes and neurodegenerative disorders, have often delayed or declined testing due to their fears that the results could affect future life insurance access or premiums. That issue was highlighted by the Australian Law Reform Commission back in 2003, when it recommended that improved safeguards should be applied to the insurance industry's use of genetic information for underwriting processes. Removing insurance related barriers increases the likelihood that individuals will engage with genetic testing earlier, that they can act on those results sooner and that they can participate more fully in risk management, early treatment and clinical trials.”
“Genetic testing and genomic research are essential to improving prevention, care and treatment for individuals and their families and for reducing Australia's burden of chronic disease. The legislation before the House, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, prohibits life insurers from using genetic test results to discriminate against applicants when offering life insurance cover. It's a long-overdue reform which represents a significant shift in how genetic information can be used and misused outside clinical care. The legislation will help decouple decision-making in health from financial penalties and disincentives for individuals and their relatives. For decades, concerns about insurance implications have contributed to hesitancy around genetic testing.”
“My question is for the Treasurer. Treasurer, your government has a productivity problem and a worsening cost-of-living crisis. Every dollar invested in Australian health and medical research yields close to $4 for the Australian economy. Without giving this place a shopping list of other economic data, does the government, in their forthcoming budget, plan to invest more in medical and scientific research, recognising both the productivity dividend and the positive effect it would have on the nation's health?”
“That means genuine incentives for employers to take on first year or mature aged apprentices. It means reducing the administrative burden of apprenticeships, and it means seriously addressing apprentices' wages. The young Australians who are trying to build a future in this country deserve more than a good start. They deserve to finish, and they deserve a good job.”
“We also have to be honest about who is bearing the brunt of these barriers the most. Young women entering male dominated trades are still facing structural and cultural obstacles, and First Nations young people face enduring geographic and system disadvantages. I do support the member for Dunkley's motion, and I welcome the government's investment in fee-free vocational education to support the next generation of workers. I recognise that some in this place, like Pauline Hanson, have consistently voted against this measure, against free TAFE for young people. But the government's responsibility for apprentices doesn't end at enrolment. It extends to ensuring that the full pipeline works, from the classroom to the workforce, from the qualification to the career.”
“A young person committed to their trade can't fund themselves with $200 a week left for transport to the job site, for the tools, for their food and for a phone. It just does not add up. Meanwhile, we know that 83 per cent of those who abandon apprenticeships are in employment shortly afterwards. Most end up in cash-in-hand labouring work in the very same industries, doing similar work but without the qualifications, without the protection and without the same future. We are losing their skills to the cash economy at exactly the time that our economy needs them the most. The apprenticeship system is under strain. Host employer networks are fragmented. Group-training organisations are overstretched. The paperwork burden on small operators is unreasonable. We should be making it easier for younger people to get a first break, not harder.”
“Between June 2024 and June 2025, trade apprenticeship numbers fell by more than seven per cent, and non-trade apprenticeship numbers fell by more than 20 per cent. Young people in Kooyong are telling me that the most common reason for their walking away is that employers are unwilling to hire first-year apprentices. But they're also really dissatisfied with pay and conditions, and national figures back that up. A first-year boilermaker apprentice who finished year 12 earns about $587 a week before tax—perhaps $500 in the hand. One who didn't finish school could earn less than $500 a week. The median rent in metropolitan Melbourne is now $580 a week, and a room in a share house is often over $300 a week. The arithmetic is brutal.”
“According to Jobs and Skills Australia, roughly half of all occupations in the category of technicians and trades are currently in short supply. That's the consequence of decades of underinvestment in vocational training. Free TAFE aims to address this, although I am hearing from constituents like Ian Baker, who I met with in Kooyong last week, that, despite free TAFE, first-year apprenticeship opportunities remain very difficult to secure. Free enrolment is only valuable if it leads to completion and to a good job. According to the National Centre for Vocational Education Research, around half of all apprentices who commence their training fail to complete it. For those who started in 2020, the four-year completion rate is only 47.9 per cent.”
“I thank the member for Dunkley for the opportunity to speak to this very important issue. Fee-free TAFE is one of the most significant investments that this government has made in working Australians. Enrolments in priority courses like construction, early childhood education, nursing and clean energy have surged. Free TAFE is telling students that our country is willing to invest in their future. The case for fee-free TAFE is also economic. Every qualified worker that we train here is a worker that we don't have to import. Every young Australian who enters the workforce will contribute to their community, to our tax base and to Australia's productive capacity. But, despite this investment, Australia still faces critical workforce shortages in a number of key sectors.”
“By investing in these sorts of measures—like insulation, solar and helping rentals electrify—Australia can ease the immediate cost-of-living pressures facing millions of Australians. Measures like these will help families lower their energy bills while reducing demand on our electricity grid and strengthening the resilience and security of our domestic market.”
“So, not only is there a cost-of-living argument; household insulation will also help Australia reach our emission reduction targets. All federal, state and territory governments have committed to net zero by 2050. Reaching this target will require a commitment to household energy upgrades—upgrades like insulation, like solar, and like home and community batteries—to improve energy efficiency across all of our Australian housing stock. Following the success of the Cheaper Home Batteries Program, I welcome the government's announcement of a $7.2 million expansion of that program. But at this point, as we look at the upcoming budget, I encourage the government to continue investing not just in this initiative but also in other targeted clean energy household subsidies.”
“Targeted insulation upgrades can significantly improve the energy efficiency of existing Australian homes. It can help households to need and to use less energy, in turn helping to lower household energy costs and to reduce demand on Australia's energy grid. Insulation is a cost-effective solution across all climates—hot and cold. Properly installed ceiling insulation can reduce indoor summer temperatures by up to seven degrees and winter heat losses by as much as 35 per cent. Through insulation alone, one million homes in Victoria could save more than 11 petajoules of energy in total, or approximately 3,085 gigawatt-hours every year. It's been projected that insulation could save Australian households between $400 and $800 in their energy bills annually, while reducing peak demand on our energy grid.”
“In this global context, at the time of an impending energy crisis, the need to invest in Australia's energy security and sovereign capability has never been clearer. The government's Cheaper Home Batteries Program was an important home upgrade initiative to help people electrify and bring down their energy bills. It saw more batteries installed in the last six months of 2025 than in the preceding five years altogether, demonstrating the effectiveness of targeted clean energy subsidies. We need more of those sorts of initiatives. An obvious example is household insulation. Many Australian homes remain either underinsulated or uninsulated. Most Australian homes were built before minimum energy efficiency requirements were introduced nationally in 2003. The cheapest energy is the energy that you don't have to use.”