Andrew Wallace
Fisher · Liberal National Party · Australia
“Based on that meeting, I worked pretty closely with the former shadow minister for communications David Coleman, and I was the chair of the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee when, with the member for Newcastle, we held an inquiry into protecting the age of innocence.”
“On 3 January 2018, Dolly Everett passed away at the age of 14. She was a young woman, a young lady, who had been bullied mercilessly. Sadly, she took her own life as a result of the bullying she encountered on social media. That happened not long into my parliamentary term in this place.”
“Later, in June 2024, the then opposition leader Peter Dutton pledged that a coalition government would implement a ban on social media for under-16s within 100 days of taking office. The Labor government did not introduce a bill to protect under-16s from social media until 12 months after we introduced our private member's bill.”
“It was the coalition that consistently led the charge on the protection of children. We actually set up the eSafety Commissioner—and what we now know, from the eSafety Commissioner herself, is that 70 per cent of children are still on social media as a result of this government's flawed legislation.”
“The continuity, the trust and the prevention that a good family GP, like my doctor in Maroochydore, provides cannot be replicated by a clipboard and a six-minute timer. That is where the human cost begins to accumulate. Bulk-billing has collapsed under this government, no matter what those opposite say or how they try and spin it.”
“For decades, Commonwealth governments, including coalition governments, have used health incentive payments to support quality care, to encourage digital health adoption, to sustain general practice in aged-care settings and to keep doctors working in rural and remote communities, where the economics of medicine are hard and the distances…”
The complete record
Every one of 667 lines we hold for Andrew Wallace, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 14.
“For every public building that's being built by those contractors that I spoke about earlier—the plumbers, sparkies, carpenters, formworkers and concreters—if they can get 150 bucks an hour on a CFMEU job, why would they want to take on another job for less? Why would they? That drives up the cost of the construction sector. It drives up the cost of building things in Australia. It drives up the cost of infrastructure. What that means is that we all pay more tax. We wonder why this government is looking for another $280 billion to take from the Australian taxpayer to pay for this sort of shenanigans. It is unfathomable that those members opposite can stand in here—”
“This is effectively the way this government operates to control the construction sector, which has tens of billions of dollars worth of contracts each and every year. This is the payback for their CFMEU mates. This is how this government looks after their CFMEU mates. The evidence is incontrovertible, whether it's the best-practice industry conditions in Queensland or whether it's the $15 billion worth of graft and corruption in the construction sector in Victoria, and there is so much more evidence to come out. It means that everyday mums and dads are paying more money, more taxes, to pay for roads, bridges and buildings—but not just public buildings.”
“They had no idea that this was going on, despite my banging on about it for eight years beforehand. For eight years I've been talking about this in this place. The member for Watson, who was then responsible for it, came into the chamber about 18 months ago and said, 'Oh, we had no idea about this graft and corruption!' What a load of rubbish. This bill effectively provides the Commonwealth with the ability to provide preferred treatment to enter into contracts with the Commonwealth to businesses who have approved EBAs with the CFMEU. To anybody who is listening to this from any building site around the country—and I know you are listening—what you should read from that is that if you don't have an EBA that is approved by the CFMEU you will no longer get Commonwealth government contracts; you will be locked out.”
“Thankfully John Howard, when he was the Prime Minister, outlawed that practice through his freedom-of-association rules and laws. But unfortunately it has crept back in. The unofficial practice of 'no ticket, no start', whilst it was illegal, is effectively what unions like the CFMEU did. They introduced these rules: 'Sunshine, if you want a job doing the traffic control on this site, if you want a job doing the form work on this site, if you want a job doing the steelwork on this site, you've got to sign a CFMEU approved EBA. And if you don't, not only will we not allow you on this site but we will black ban every single one of the sites you are working on throughout this country.' Apparently, according to members opposite who received very generous donations from the CFMEU, this all came as some great revelation.”
“Now they've seen the light and they realise just how corrupt the CFMEU is, and they want to provide a means by which they can provide preferential treatment for unions who have particular enterprise bargaining agreements that provide preferential treatment to the CFMEU. How can that be? How can it be, when Geoffrey Watson SC recently identified $15 billion worth of graft and corruption in the Victorian construction sector—just in Victoria—involving the CFMEU? When I was a lad, when we walked up to building sites there used to be a huge sign on the front gate, and that sign said 'No ticket, no start'—meaning that if you weren't a member of the then Builders Labourers Federation you could not get a job on that building site.”
“What the changes in this legislation will effectively do is allow the Commonwealth to ensure that, in contracts that the Commonwealth enters into, contractors who are aligned with the CFMEU or have a particular arrangement with the CFMEU can be preferred to other contractors. Let that sink in for a moment. How could it be that, in 2026, this government, after everything that has happened with the royal commission into the building industry, with what's going on with the Commission of Inquiry into the CFMEU in Queensland right now and with all of the graft and corruption—the federal Labor Party have had their eyes opened just in the last 18 months.”
“Needless to say, those minor amendments have the support of the coalition. But I want to turn to the insidious nature of this bill, the insidious aspect that those members opposite don't really want to talk about, and that is in relation to the procurement bargaining involving the Commonwealth. Madam Deputy Speaker, as someone who worked as a young lad on building sites across Victoria—your state—on the first day of my apprenticeship, I was bullied relentlessly by members of the then Builders Labourers Federation, now the CFMEU. It was the first day of my apprenticeship on a building site. I would have been 18 years old and 70 kilos wringing wet, and I was apparently sweeping the floor too quickly for the liking of these two CFMEU goons. That started my significant distrust in the CFMEU.”
“Thirdly, the bill allows the Fair Work Commission to dismiss unfair deactivation and unfair termination applications where they're frivolous, vexatious or have no reasonable prospects of success—fair enough. Fourthly, the bill also allows the Fair Work Commission to decide certain contested matters on the papers. I had the privilege of being an adjudicator for many years in my legal profession, where I determined matters on the papers. There are many instances where judicial officers or quasi-judicial officers have the benefit or the ability to be able to determine disputes on the papers—that is, without having an oral hearing. It saves the parties money and saves the parties time, so we don't have a problem with that. There are some other minor amendments, which I won't take up the time of the chamber with.”
“To do away with that jurisdictional issue is reasonable, given the massive backload in the Fair Work Commission that this government finds itself with. We think that that's a reasonable way to help ease the burden on the Fair Work Commission. The practical effect of this change is to reduce the unnecessary preliminary hearings, and it will allow the Fair Work Commission to get on with doing its job: helping parties to resolve their disputes. The bill also creates a framework for the President of the Fair Work Commission to delegate certain procedural powers in unresolved dismissal and unlawful termination disputes to senior commission staff. Similarly, we don't have an issue with that.”
“I'm going to ensure that this government is open and transparent and honest and all that sort of stuff.' Well, we all know now, after four years, that anything could be further from the truth. This government continues, almost on a daily basis, to try and sneak stuff into what might otherwise be uncontentious legislation. It's hoping that the coalition will miss the insidious aspects of this bill. In relation to the jurisdictional objections, this is an issue that we don't have a problem with. The jurisdictional objections clutter up the Fair Work Commission on the basis of arguments between employer and employee about whether someone was terminated or whether their position was terminated or not. There needs to be a specific or an individual hearing like a threshold hearing on that point.”
“The first one we support; the second one we do not support. In relation to the four main Fair Work Commission changes—the jurisdictional objections, the delegations, the vexatious litigants and determining matters on the papers—these are all are relatively sensible reforms, and the coalition is happy to support those. The coalition would like to see the government act responsibly and split the bill into these two main themes. I recall, back in 2022, when this Prime Minister first won office, in one of his first speeches, he stood up and said, 'I'm going to be a prime minister for the whole of this country. I'm not going to create any wedges in legislation.”
“I rise with great interest in the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026, as someone who made a living out of the construction sector for 35-odd years before I came into this place, as a carpenter and joiner, as a registered builder and as a construction lawyer. There are some good elements in this bill that the opposition is happy to support, but there are some terrible elements of this bill, which I will leave to my discussions later on. Firstly, let's just have a quick look at some of the good aspects of this bill. The bill is basically in two main thematic parts. There are some changes to the Fair Work Commission and changes relating to enterprise agreements in Commonwealth procurement. They're the two main issues, the two themes of this bill.”
“Members opposite should not think that they are immune to those same sorts of pressures that we are seeing in the UK happening here, because the same sorts of pressures are very real. Mums and dads are hurting. Our homelessness is off the Richter scale. So many people are doing it tough. This government is letting down people left, right and centre. They've had enough, they want a change, and they'll get it with a Liberal-National coalition government.”
“So small businesses have never done it tougher than what they are experiencing right now under this government. That's why—and it pains me to say this, as someone who was in small business for 30-odd years before coming into this place—we have never seen a higher rate of small-business insolvency than what we are experiencing under this Albanese government. For those members opposite, who might chortle and think, 'We're sitting on a 94-seat majority; we can withstand just about anything that comes our way'—I've got news for them. I'm sure that Keir Starmer also had similar views to what I'm hearing from those members opposite. Two years ago, Keir Starmer won in a landslide. One year ago, Labor won in a landslide.”
“They know, and they will not cop it. When I make my way around my electorate of Fisher, Australians are telling me, particularly small businesses—these are the same small businesses that are feeling like this government is crunching down on them at every step of the way. These are the same people who are paying $29,000 on average for the mortgage repayments for their homes. Unlike everyday, average mums and dads that don't have a small business, these small-business people are not only paying $29,000 a year more on their home loans than they were under a coalition government, after tax; they're also paying commensurately higher interest rates on their business loans. And, for every home energy bill they get, they're paying a lot more as well on the energy bills for their businesses.”
“So, when this government comes in and says—when even the Prime Minister, in his own words, says: 'How many times have I got to tell you? Fifty times,' that he is not going to introduce these new taxes, but then does, and then refuses to acknowledge that he has been anything other than dishonest with the Australian people, then Australians have a right to be very upset with this prime minister. Once upon a time in this country, when politicians, even in the Labor Party, if I can draw upon Peter Beattie, a former Queensland Labor premier—Peter Beattie was the master of mea culpa. When he stuffed something up, he stood up in front of the cameras and said, 'I got this wrong.' But not this prime minister—he won't even admit that he's breaking promises. He just says, 'We've changed our position.' Australians are all over this.”
“There are very salient lessons for those members opposite out of this, because the UK and Australia are obviously very similar with our systems of government. Australians will not cop dishonesty from their governments, just as in the UK, where there have been all sorts of problems with their immigration, all sorts of problems with their energy policies, all sorts of problems with their living standards—does that ring any bells to you, Madam Deputy Speaker? They are the sorts of challenges that we are experiencing in this country today. We were promised, in this country, by this government, that we would all be enjoying a $275 reduction in our energy prices, and we're paying 40 per cent more for our energy now, under this government. And Australians have had enough.”
“And these are exactly the sorts of changes that the government wants to introduce. Madam Deputy Speaker Payne, you should be in no doubt, and nor should any of those members opposite, that Australians are very, very upset with this government. Although it has a 94-seat majority, there are a lot of those members opposite who are—if I can channel my Monty Python—on wafer-thin majorities! In England we saw Keir Starmer win in a landslide, just two years ago, and then we saw, just last night, that Keir Starmer had resigned and is now filling the spot until UK Labour find a replacement. Just two years ago, UK Labour won in a landslide, and I think they won on a very similar majority primary vote to what we saw here in Australia just 12 months ago in 2025.”
“They think that Australians are—actually, I don't think that even the most ardent Labor member would think that they've got the support of the Australian people, because they know that the Australian people will be coming after them with pitchforks at the next election on these taxation policies. Well, we will soon find out. I will take that interjection. I'd encourage the member for Isaacs, when he next wants to come on a holiday, to come up to the beautiful Sunshine Coast, enjoy our warmth in wintertime, and just see how angry people are. And they are angry. They are angry at this government. Australians will cop a lot of things, but we won't cop it when our governments are dishonest with us. This prime minister told us that he would not introduce changes to the capital gains tax, to negative gearing, to superannuation or to trusts.”
“They do so at their own peril, because, for Australians, I've got to tell you: as I make my way around my electorate, this government is on the nose. In some recent surveying that I did of my community, 70 per cent of those surveyed said that they believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction—70 per cent. If that doesn't send shivers down the spine of the government, I don't know what will. But, you see, this is the thing: the government is sitting on a 94 per cent massive mega-majority, but they have become complacent. They have become arrogant—full of hubris. They think they are untouchable.”
“The Greens had a choice of working with the Liberal-National coalition by providing a longer, more detailed examination of the NDIS bill and looking at how the NDIS could more properly be reformed. The Greens talked the big talk about looking after people with disabilities. But when the opportunity came to whack more Australians with higher taxes—$280 billion worth of additional taxes—the Greens jumped at that opportunity and dropped their aspirations to fix up what has been a disastrous NDIS under this government. The Greens talk the talk; they never walk the walk. The Greens had this opportunity to provide greater scrutiny of the government's NDIS bill, and they've just ducked it. They have chosen to stand for higher taxes with this government.”
“We learnt this afternoon that the Labor Party and the Greens have done a grubby, dishonest, dirty deal with each other to get these tax changes through the parliament. If anybody needed any further proof of where this government is going, today is a classic example. The government needed the assistance of the Greens, the party that is on the far left of politics, to pass these taxation laws. The Australian people didn't vote for a Labor-Greens coalition; they voted for a Labor government—unfortunately, but we respect the will of the people. But they didn't vote for some kind of coalition between these two parties. Let's talk about the Greens for a moment. The Greens had a choice.”
“The Crisafulli government has been forced to pick up the tab and pick up the slack to keep these critical projects moving and improve road safety outcomes for Queenslanders. There's one consistent thing when it comes to road infrastructure. When we were in government at a federal level, we supported projects in Queensland that we didn't have to, when the Labor government were in power. We needed to prop up the Labor government because they weren't spending money on the Sunshine Coast. Now that Labor are in government at a federal level, the LNP state government are once again having to pick up where this Labor government have stepped back. Labor doesn't care about the Sunshine Coast. I'll continue to harangue them every step of the way until they pick up their game on road and infrastructure spend.”
“We've seen cuts to funding that the member for Fairfax and I worked so hard to get for projects like the Mooloolah River Interchange and roads like the second access route into Caloundra—both cut by the member for Ballarat, the infrastructure minister. Two major projects on the Sunshine Coast that I fought for and secured funding for were cut by this Labor government. Why? Because Labor doesn't care about the Sunshine Coast. We've seen uncertainty around every major transport investment from this federal government on the Sunshine Coast. We've seen local motorists left wondering when the infrastructure that they were promised will finally be delivered. Thankfully, the Queensland LNP government has stepped up where the Albanese government has stepped back.”
“At the same time, Labor continues to collect billions more in fuel excise from Australian motorists. Australians are paying more at the bowser and getting less investment in the roads they rely upon every day. Nowhere is this more evident than in my electorate of Fisher. The Sunshine Coast is one of the fastest-growing regions in Australia. Our population continues to grow, but the infrastructure needed to support that growth is simply not keeping pace. For local residents, traffic congestion is worsening, travel times are increasing and critical road upgrades continue to face delays. We've seen cuts and delays to projects that our community desperately needs.”
“In Queensland alone, 158 people have already lost their lives on our roads just this calendar year. Tragically, we are tracking above last year's figures, which were the worst in more than 16 years. Behind every one of those statistics is a devastated family, a grieving community and a life cut short. That's why road safety must always be about outcomes, not announcements. Unfortunately, we've seen from the Albanese government a pattern of cuts, delays and broken promises when it comes to transport infrastructure. Since coming to office, Labor has cancelled, cut or delayed more than $30 billion worth of transport infrastructure projects across this country. In this year's budget alone, the government cut a further $3.9 billion in payments to the states and territories for road infrastructure.”
“Let me say from the outset that every member of this House supports safer roads, safer pathways and safer communities. We all want Australians to be able to walk, ride and exercise safely in their local communities, getting you home sooner and safer. But what Australians are looking for is not another Labor announcement; they are looking for results. While the government wants to talk about active transport, communities like mine on the Sunshine Coast are asking a much more fundamental question: why are our roads becoming less safe under Labor? The facts are deeply concerning. Road fatalities across Australia continue to rise. The National Road Safety Strategy set an ambitious target of halving road deaths by 2030. Yet since that strategy commenced, the national road toll has gone backwards, not forwards.”
“It doesn't mention that 12 leading nursing and healthcare organisations have warned a Senate inquiry that Medicare policy is materially compromising timely access to care in rural and regional Australia. Under Labor, nurse practitioner bulk-billing has fallen sharply, and regional patients are being slugged more at exactly the time they can least afford it. The coalition is absolutely committed to Medicare. It always will be in the future. Medicare is a vital part of the health services in this country— (Time expired)”
“Independent analysis shows that, in two-thirds of electorates, average out-of-pocket fees for a standard consult now exceed $45 and, in some electorates, the total cost of a visit is pushing beyond $100. In my own electorate of Fisher, non-bulk-billed patients are paying significantly more than they were just a couple of years ago, even after Labor's so-called Strengthening Medicare reforms. That is not a system delivering free health care; that is a system shifting more costs onto ordinary patients. This motion doesn't mention that Labor's incentive has sent more money into already well-served communities while underserved regional, rural and outer suburban areas see clinics close, doctors leave and patients travel further and pay more.”
“The motion congratulates Labor on spending $8.5 billion of taxpayers' money. It pats itself on the back for 3,800 bulk-billing practices. But it says nothing about the Australians who still can't find a doctor, still can't afford one and still see their local services being hollowed out. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare tells us that, after peaking at around 89 per cent in 2020, the national GP bulk-billing rate fell to 77 per cent in 2023 and only inched back to 78 per cent in the first 10 months of 2024, still well below where it was under the coalition. For the key working age group, 16- to 64-year-olds, bulk-billing sits at around 69 per cent. Labor's so-called 'free health care' is least available to the Australians most likely to be juggling work, children and mortgages. Out-of-pocket costs have surged.”
“The beauty about a universal healthcare system in this country such as Medicare is that it doesn't matter who you are, it doesn't matter how wealthy you are, it doesn't matter what your job is and it doesn't matter what your postcode is; you will be able to get the world's best treatment at a tertiary hospital, provided you live in the cities. For those people who live in the bush or live in rural and regional Australia, it's a lot harder. They have to often be transferred to a tertiary hospital through organisations like the Royal Flying Doctor Service, who do incredible work. But the coalition is absolutely supportive of Medicare because it does provide access to world-class doctors and world-class medical treatment. The motion that's before the House today notes that bulk-billing has ticked up in the March quarter.”
“The member for Macarthur was going so well until he started bagging the coalition out. But I do want to just acknowledge the member for Macarthur because I think he's a decent fellow and he is a lifelong paediatrician who has served his local community. Good on him. We need more paediatricians. You should go back and be a paediatrician, serving your local community that way. Those members opposite often talk about how they're the champions of Medicare. Well, I've got to tell you that the coalition absolutely supports Medicare. It absolutely supports it. The last thing we would want to see in Australia is a US-style healthcare system where, if you get sick and seriously sick, then that could often be a death sentence to you, or certainly a life-changing situation.”
“The illicit tobacco market is now worth billions of dollars. It's costing taxpayers billions in lost revenue. It is enriching organised crime, and it is creating real community safety concerns across Australia. This crisis did not happen overnight. It developed over years of poor policy decisions, weak enforcement and government inaction. The Albanese government has lost control of illicit tobacco. This bill is an acknowledgement of that reality. The coalition will support any measure that helps restore order, but we will continue to argue for a broader, stronger and more comprehensive response, because this is no longer about tobacco; it's about organised crime, tax evasion and community safety, and it is about protecting the interests of Australian taxpayers.”
“It's about ensuring criminal syndicates cannot operate with impunity, and it's about ensuring Australians actually feel safe in their neighbourhoods. The growth of the illicit tobacco market has brought with it organised crime, intimidation, violence and criminal activity. The longer governments allow those networks to become entrenched, the harder they become to dismantle. That is why this issue deserves serious attention. That is why the coalition continue to push for stronger action. The coalition will support the Combating Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. We support stronger law enforcement powers, we support stronger proceeds-of-crime measures, and we support sensible efforts to disrupt organised criminal activity. But Australians should be under no illusion. This legislation alone will not solve the problem.”
“We need stronger border enforcement, we need greater intelligence sharing, we need stronger cooperation between Commonwealth agencies and state police, we need greater financial investigation capability, we need more aggressive use of proceeds-of-crime laws, and we need stronger coordination with states and territories. Many Australians have seen illegal tobacco stores shut down only to reopen days later. Many Australians have seen criminal operators appear to continue trading with little consequence. That cannot continue. There must be real consequences for those who repeatedly break the law, there must be meaningful disruption of criminal supply chains, and there must be a coordinated national response. This debate is ultimately about more than tobacco. It's about protecting communities.”
“Courts already have significant penalties available to them, yet criminal organisations continue to operate because they do not fear being caught. That is why stronger enforcement must sit alongside stronger penalties. Without meaningful disruption, criminal organisations will simply adapt, and they will continue to operate. Perhaps the greatest weakness of this bill is that it does not form part of a broader national strategy. The coalition calls on the government to finally develop and implement a comprehensive national strategy to combat illicit tobacco and organised criminal activity. That is exactly what is required.”
“Importantly, the legislation expands access to telecommunications interception powers for serious illicit tobacco offences. These are sensible reforms. They will provide additional tools for investigators, they'll assist police and enforcement agencies, and they should help make it harder for criminal organisations to operate. For these reasons, the coalition will support the bill. Supporting the bill, however, does not mean ignoring its shortcomings. The reality is that much of this legislation focuses on increasing penalties on paper. The government talks big about stronger penalties, it talks big about longer prison terms, it talks big about larger fines, but penalties only matter if criminals believe that they will actually be caught. The central challenge is not simply the size of the penalty; the central challenge is enforcement.”
“Who cares about how we get them off the streets or how they end up going to prison, as long as we get them off the streets and as long as they go to prison. If they go to prison for tax fraud, so be it. We need to follow the money, freeze the assets, seize the profits and take away the financial incentive, because, if organised criminals continue to make enormous profits, they will continue to find new ways to operate. To be fair to the government, there are elements of this bill that the coalition welcomes. The bill seeks to strengthen the risk-to-reward calculation for criminal actors by increasing penalties and improving the ability of authorities to pursue criminal profits. The bill also strengthens proceeds-of-crime arrangements and expands investigative powers available to law enforcement agencies.”
“The tax office can't keep going after the low-hanging fruit. The money trail is often the most effective way to dismantle organised crime. We all know the stories of Al Capone and his exploits. He was never charged or convicted in the US of all of the many crimes and alleged murders that he had committed or organised to be committed. At the end of the day, they got him for tax fraud. That's something that we should be doing here. If we can't get these people for the firebombings, extortions and assaults, let's go after them from a tax perspective. Most people would be more scared of a tax inspector than they would be of a member of the police force. People who are involved in these illicit schemes should be worried about the tax office coming and knocking on their door.”
“We all know that. The Australian Tax Office has sophisticated capabilities. It has investigative, compliance and enforcement powers. Yet somehow criminal enterprises operating multimillion-dollar illicit tobacco networks continue to flourish. Australians are entitled to ask how this could possibly be. How is it that there are hardworking, everyday Australians out there working hard to put food on the table and to pay their rent or their mortgage who are also paying their taxes, yet these criminal syndicates seem to be getting away with blue murder? If we can dedicate resources to investigating relatively small tax discrepancies that everyday mums and dads often get picked up on, surely we can dedicate greater resources to pursuing criminal syndicates that are evading millions of dollars in customs duties and excise revenue.”
“That is money that could have been spent on hospitals, roads, defence, aged care, disability services and infrastructure. Instead, it is disappearing down the black hole of the black market. Australians are being taxed more, while criminal syndicates avoid paying any tax at all. That is not fair to hardworking mum-and-dad Australian taxpayers or to small and big businesses alike. It is certainly not sustainable. At its core, illicit tobacco is one of the largest tax evasion schemes operating in Australia today. That is why I believe we need to think differently about this problem. For too long, governments have viewed illicit tobacco primarily through a health lens, but it must also be viewed through a taxation and organised crime lens. The Commonwealth has extensive powers to pursue Australians who fail to meet their tax obligations.”
“While Labor was increasing the excise and celebrating projected revenue gains, criminal organisations were building a thriving black market right under our noses. One aspect of this issue that receives far too little attention is the enormous loss of government revenue. Every illegal cigarette sold represents excise revenue that is never collected. Every shipment of illicit tobacco imported into Australia represents money that should have gone into the Commonwealth's coffers. While Labor originally forecast billions in additional revenue from its excise increases, the Parliamentary Budget Office has estimated that those policies will reduce budget revenue by more than $20 billion between 2024-25 and 2028-29. That is a staggering figure.”
“The coalition's amendment notes that repeated increases in tobacco excise significantly widened the gap between legal and illegal tobacco products, driving consumers towards the black market and dramatically increasing the profitability of organised criminal supply. Now, let me be clear: nobody on this side of the House is arguing that tobacco use should be encouraged—at least I don't think any of my colleagues are. Perhaps we might have some smokers on our side. But governments must recognise that, when legal products become dramatically more expensive, criminal markets step in to fill the gap. There is the age-old saying that 'nature abhors a vacuum'. That is precisely what has happened. Organised crime recognised the opportunity. The profits became enormous and criminal syndicates moved quickly to exploit that opportunity.”
“The coalition's amendment correctly notes that illicit tobacco has become a multibillion-dollar black market increasingly linked to organised crime, violent criminal networks and serious community harm. We've seen the reports of firebombings. We've seen reports of extortion. We've seen criminal groups fighting over territory and profits. This is no longer simply a public health issue, as important as that is. It has become a significant law and order issue. It has become a significant domestic national security issue. Australians are rightly concerned. The unfortunate reality is that this crisis did not emerge overnight, nor did it emerge by accident. The Albanese government's approach to tobacco excise has played a significant role in creating the conditions that have allowed this black market to flourish.”
“Australia is now facing a full-blown illicit tobacco crisis. The government's own illicit tobacco and e-cigarette commissioner estimates that the illicit tobacco market is worth somewhere between 4.1 and $6.9 billion annually. That figure alone should alarm every member of this House. This is not some small black market operating on the fringes of society. This is a sophisticated, highly profitable criminal enterprise generating billions of dollars every year. Those profits are not flowing into the legitimate economy. They're not funding public services. They're not supporting Australian jobs. They're flowing directly into the hands of organised criminal syndicates, who are doing significant damage to our community, to our social fabric, by, as an example, firebombing legitimate businesses.”
“The coalition will support the passage of the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill 2026. We support measures that strengthen law enforcement powers, disrupt organised criminal activity and make it harder for criminals to profit from illicit tobacco. However, while this bill contains some worthwhile measures, we shouldn't pretend that it represents a comprehensive solution to the crisis that Australia now faces. This bill is ultimately a response to a problem that has exploded under Labor's watch. It's a crisis that has been a number of years in the making and a crisis that extends far beyond just tobacco. This is about organised crime, community safety, lost government revenue and whether Australians can have confidence that the rule of law, which underpins our society, is being upheld.”
“Just this morning I received a letter from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry warning that Labor's capital gains tax changes will mean less investment, less innovation and fewer jobs. I've also seen overwhelming support for my campaign in my electorate against Labor's health tax on seniors. More than 8,000 Australians have signed my petition opposing Labor's decision to strip private health insurance rebates from older Australians. Australians are tired of backflips, they are tired of uncertainty and they are tired of this government. It is the most socialist government this country ever— (Time expired)”
“Last week, Labor was forced into yet another backflip. After six weeks of defending its budget, the government suddenly discovered what Australians already knew: this budget is flawed. It is fundamentally flawed. But let's be clear. Labor's toxic taxes don't need a tweak. They don't need a carve out. They need an axe. You don't fix a bad tax by making it more complicated, you scrap it and you start again. The problem isn't that Labor forgot to exempt one group or another; the problem is that this government sees higher taxes as the answer to every problem. Tax retirement savings, tax investment, tax aspiration—they'll probably tax inspiration as well!”
“Why did this government not provide or institute temporary exclusion orders on these other individuals? I'd really like an answer to that question. Finally, Minister, I'm very keen to understand—this perhaps may have been dealt with in estimates, and I may have missed it—why was Ben Roberts-Smith humiliated? He was filmed effectively being dragged off the plane and away from his family while these ISIS brides effectively received the gold treatment from this government. (Time expired)”
“We can all feel a high degree of sympathy for the kids, but the women and men that left this country to do that have to face the consequences of their very poor decisions. Why is it that of all of the ISIS brides this government has only once used a temporary exclusion order? Despite the fact that a number of the returnees were charged with some very serious criminal offences, why did this government not form the view that a temporary exclusion order should've been placed on these people who were returning to this country? A temporary exclusion order is not a permanent ban. It simply enables the government to control these people's return in a much more systematic and controlled way so that law enforcement agencies and our intelligence agencies can then manage their return.”