Jo Briskey
Maribyrnong · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“This Saturday night, the mighty Melbourne Vixens are back in another grand final, their fifth in seven years, and we're going back to back. Five of these women also put on the green and gold for the Australian Diamonds, arguably the most successful national team our country has produced. But here's what gets me.”
“Yesterday, that ask was again answered in another large step forward—the biggest expansion of paid parental leave since Labor created the scheme. This week, paid parental leave in Australia is now a full six months, 26 weeks, paid at a higher rate at just over $1,000 a week, with income limits lifted so more families qualify.”
“Superannuation now lands with every payday instead of months behind, which protects workers least able to absorb being shortchanged. Every one of those changes helps on its own, but, arriving all at once, they take the real pressure off working families. That is real change delivered.”
“Before I came into this place, I spent about just over five years as the CEO of the Parenthood, Australia's peak advocacy body for parents and carers. Our work focused on how we make Australia the best place in the world to be a parent. I spent many hours in this building helping amplify the voices of parents and the needs that they had.”
“But this government is changing it. We're funding pay rises for female dominated sectors like aged care and early childhood education, and the gender pay gap is the lowest it's ever been. This week, paid parental leave grew to 26 weeks, with super paid on top, so that raising a child no longer costs a woman her career or her retirement.”
“When it began in 2011, it gave families 18 weeks, and I watched it change households. I also watched how quickly it could be put at risk. In 2015, parents who used the scheme exactly as it was designed got branded double dippers by those opposite, as if caring for a newborn were a rort.”
The complete record
Every one of 729 lines we hold for Jo Briskey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 15.
“The four bills before the House work together to create something Australia has never had before, a comprehensive, enforceable consumer protection framework for aviation. At the heart of the package is the Aviation Consumer Protections Charter, a document that will spell out in plain and accessible terms what every passenger can expect when they fly. We're moving on from the days of fine print and airlines interpreting their own obligations. Instead, there would be a clear, publicly accessible set of minimum standards backed by law that passengers can point to and say, 'That is what I'm owed.' The charter will be brought to life by the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority, which will monitor compliance across the sector and take enforcement action where those standards aren't being met.”
“A staggering 79 per cent of Australians say they know little or nothing about their rights as an air passenger. So, in one of the most regulated industries in the world, the people this industry depends on are almost entirely in the dark. I want to be clear that our government does not think every airline and every airport is deliberately setting out to do the wrong thing by their customers. Many of the people working in this industry genuinely care about the people they serve, but the system around them hasn't supported good outcomes, and that's not their fault. There's been no charter of rights, no independent umpire and no consistent minimum standard that passengers could rely on. They've been navigating an uneven playing field without even knowing the rules of the game. This legislation levels that playing field.”
“Our government's BETA preparing for take-off study is one of the most thorough pieces of passenger research ever conducted in this country. What it found was an aviation sector treating its consumers with contempt. More than half of all Australians who flew in the last 12 months experienced a flight disruption. Of those passengers, 82 per cent received no support at all—no accommodation, no alternative arrangements—with 81 per cent never even told what their rights were. Let's think about that for the moment. The majority of Australians who fly have had their travel disrupted, and the overwhelming majority of them were then left to figure it out entirely on their own. It doesn't end there. Of those who tried to make a complaint, only 17 per cent—fewer than one in five—were satisfied with the process.”
“They're the baggage handlers, the check-in staff, the engineers on the tarmac at five in the morning and the retail workers keeping the terminal buzzing. These are people who quite literally keep our community and our country moving every single day, and I am enormously proud to represent them in this place. Those same people are also passengers, and, like passengers right across the country, far too many of them have had the experience of a cancelled flight. They've been handed a travel voucher when what they should have received was a cash refund, and they've spent hours on hold with nothing to show for it. These are experiences we've all had, and they are simply not good enough. Today that starts to change. The suite of legislation we are debating today came from listening.”
“The Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026, the Aviation Consumer Protection (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026, the Aviation Consumer Protection Levy Bill 2026 and the Aviation Consumer Protection Levy (Collection) Bill 2026, are quite personal to my community. Our connection with aviation is like very few others in this country. Essendon airport sits in the heart of my electorate. It's a vital hub of freight, emergency services, charter flights, regional connectivity and, of course, employment. Just across the boundary is one of the country's biggest airports and major employers, the Melbourne Airport at Tullamarine, so the importance of aviation to my community is undeniable. Thousands of my constituents wake up every morning and head to one of these airports for work.”
“We can be a country that buys its intelligence off the shelf from somewhere else and rents it forever, or we can be a country that builds the thing, owns it and trains our people to run it—shaped around our values, not somebody else's. I know which one I want for the kids growing up in my community. I don't want them to be tenants in someone else's future. I want them owning a piece of their own. That's why this government is getting in early and doing it properly on Australia's terms and in our national interest.”
“They're back at it next month, and the water ministers are sitting down in August to lock it down with the rest of the states. For me, the real test is pretty simple. As AI grows, who's better off? That's why we are already expecting companies to open up computing power to Australian startups and to work with our researchers, because we absolutely want to back in Australian innovation as part of this tech revolution. We want them training Australians and giving our kids a way into skilled, well-paid jobs. We're not only chasing the upside; we're acting on those worries I raised at the start too. That's why we launched the AI Safety Institute—to test the systems and to make sure the rules around this technology are written here and are in our national interest. In the end, it comes down to a choice.”
“If a data centre wants to benefit from Australia's energy grid, then it must pay its full share of the network infrastructure costs, to ensure those are not passed on to consumers or businesses, and provide demand flexibility and cooperate with market operators to strengthen the energy grid. On top of that, they must look after their water. We're not doing this without listening to our communities. Our plan is backed by the ACTU, the Smart Energy Council and the Water Services Association of Australia, who are key leaders in their fields. As I said, AI is here, and we should do everything we can, in terms of the data centres that are required, to ensure that they are built in our interests. That's why energy ministers met in May.”
“We've seen overseas, in parts of the US, how badly this can go when it is rushed. Sites are thrown up fast, soaking up enormous amounts of resources, and working people are left to foot the bill. Well, I'm not having that here, and neither is our government. The people in my community have every right to expect that the project down the road will not push up their power bills or take their water. That's why, back in March, our government set out five clear expectations for anyone who wants to build them here. We are doing the work with the state and local governments to set in these frameworks. On energy, we're acting to make them an asset to our energy grid, not something that puts a strain on it.”
“They worry about knowing what's real, what's genuine and what's artificial, what's mis- or disinformation. These are fair and genuine concerns, and some of what the critics say is true. But I don't talk AI down, because the opportunities are just as real. We can build this industry instead of rent it, and barely a country on Earth is better placed to do it than Australia. We have the land, we have the natural resources, we have the researchers and 1,500 AI startups already at it. So our job is to be straight about both and drive what is in the best interest of Australians. What people feel first is what is happening in their suburbs. Data centres are significant industrial operations going up where people live, near schools and near homes in places like mine.”
“I thank the member for Warringah for raising this matter. It's an issue I myself am particularly passionate about. AI is here and it is rapidly changing how we work, what we see, how we engage online and what future tech advances and economic opportunities can look like. Our Labor government seeks to take every opportunity to ensure that we can shape this revolution on our own terms rather than on someone else's. We will always back team Australia, and that's exactly why we've already got a plan on the table. We know this is ours to get right, and getting it right means listening to the people it affects. Plenty of people are uneasy about AI, and I appreciate why. They are worried about their jobs. They are worried about having these enormous companies on the other side of the world calling all the shots.”
“A qualification—the skills and training—keeps our children safe and makes sure that the quiet one, the anxious one and the one bursting with questions each get exactly what they need. Educators have been fighting to be recognised and valued for decades. I'm proud to stand with them and their union, the United Workers Union, every step of the way, and now I'm proud to be a member of a government that has delivered for educators the pay rise that they deserve but that also recognises there's more work to do. To every early childhood educator out there: I see you, our government values you and we'll keep delivering for you.”
“This country has always relied on early childhood educators, but you wouldn't know it from what they've been paid. Our government is changing that and last week committed a further $3.6 billion to secure the 15 per cent pay rise into the future. We're backing a workforce, a profession, that has been underpaid and undervalued for simply too long, brushed aside as glorified babysitters. Unfortunately, we heard this tired old view again just recently at the National Press Club in the idea that you shouldn't need 'some sort of qualification' to look after a child. As a parent—and I know many parents stand with me—I utterly reject this notion, as does this government. Every parent who has seen the difference that their child's educator has made in either their son's or their daughter's life knows exactly how fundamental this work is.”
“We are proud to stand with working people, backing them in on higher wages and more secure work, giving them the tax cuts that they want and need and helping most of them get into their own home easier. Every day we are in this place, we focus on how we can advance the lives of working people, whereas those opposite—all three right-wing parties that we now have in this place—spend every day trying to make life harder for working people. While those opposite stand against workers, we on this side of the House stand with them. That's why I commend the bill to the House.”
“Between them, they shut down the rorts that have been used to undercut workers' pay. Penalty rate protections went into law for the first time, and some of the lowest paid workers in this country got a pay rise out of it. Every single time those measures came up to vote, those opposite voted against it. That is why we have been so determined to undo the damage of their decade in power, and it is why we bring forward this bill today. This bill is not complicated. It backs secure work, gives workers who have been shut out a way back in and lets our commission get on with their job. Those opposite will predictably whinge about it. They always rail against every protection working people have ever won, but we do not accept that insecure work and flat wages are just how it should be.”
“Under their idol John Howard, we got Work Choices, a calculated attempt to strip away the protections and the bargaining power of ordinary working people. When penalty rates were cut for some of our lowest paid workers, those opposite didn't lift a finger to reverse it. In fact, they have voted against every attempt we have made to protect take-home pay. When wages would not budge, one of their own senior ministers at the time told us why. Low wage growth, he said, was a deliberate design feature of their economic plan. That is what working people are up against—a political party hell-bent on stripping the rights of workers and the unions that defend them. We reject that completely. From our first months in office, we have set about turning it around through our secure jobs, better pay reforms and then our closing loopholes laws.”
“The weekend, the minimum wage, paid leave, superannuation—none of this was a gift handed down from above. Every one of those was fought for, and in almost every case it was fought against by the same people who now come into this chamber to cry foul about workers' rights and the unions that stand up for them. When we move to make our work more secure, we are not breaking new ground. We are doing what Labor governments have always done, and the reforms in this bill are a reflection of listening to workers, to employers and to the people who represent working people. No bill like this stands on its own. To see why this work matters, we have to remember where we are coming from. Those opposite have form.”
“A quick, certain outcome matters to a small-business owner every bit as much as it matters to a worker. Underneath all of it is something this side of the House has always believed in: that working people do best when they have a voice, when they can bargain for a fair deal directly through their union. This is not new ground for us. The Labor Party was formed from the union movement, and we've never been shy about that. Nearly every protection a worker is afforded today was won the hard way by ordinary people who organised and stood together, and nearly every one of them was resisted at the time by the conservative side of this parliament. The eight-hour day was won by the stonemasons in Melbourne in 1856, among the very first workers anywhere in the world to do so.”
“This bill does something practical about that without stripping away a single protection for workers. We want the commission free to get straight to the substance of a matter, rather than being bogged down by technicalities first. It can move quickly on claims that are frivolous or vexatious or have no reasonable prospect of success. It can decide more matters on the papers, but only where both parties agree. It cuts the red tape so supported bargaining can start back up without a fresh round of paperwork, where an authorisation is already in place. Those opposite will predictably use this debate to have another go at the union movement and the workers who join it, but let's take the politics out of it. These are sensible, practical changes that make the system fairer for everyone who uses it.”
“This bill carries on that work for the people who keep the country fed, stocked and moving. The bill also turns to the Fair Work Commission. When a workplace dispute needs settling, the commission is who settles it, and right now it needs a hand. Its case load has been climbing for years, and the pressures keep piling on. There are more paid agents in the system than ever before, and AI, as we've heard so many times before, is driving more disputes through the door and trickier ones at that. On top of all of that, a recent decision of the full Federal Court now forces the commission to work through technical jurisdictional questions before it can even begin on the substance of a general protections claim. Anyone who has dealt with the commission knows how that goes. Time and money is burnt for everyone involved.”
“But the high income threshold, the way it works now, was never built with a truckie in mind; it bears no relation to the way their costs and their earnings actually stack up. This bill fixes that, with a new threshold designed for the road transport industry—one that reflects what it really costs to keep a truck on the road. We will settle the right figure in consultation, but the aim is simple enough. When a truckie has been done over, they get a fast, fair process to put it right. This is not where we started, though. Our fairer fuel reforms have already given drivers and operators a fast track to claw back a fairer share when their costs have spiked. Our gig work laws, the first of their kind anywhere in the world, finally give employee-like workers a floor of minimum standards to stand on.”
“This bill also stands up for a group of workers that the system has too often let slip through the cracks: our truckies. Drive through the north-west of my electorate and you'll see trucks rolling out before dawn, the men and women behind the wheel keeping this country running. We saw it most clearly during the pandemic. When almost everything else stopped, they didn't. The trouble is that owner-drivers and contractors carry enormous costs before they've even had the opportunity to earn a cent—the truck, the fuel, the insurance, the rego. The margins are wafer thin, and when a contract treats them unfairly, too many have had nowhere to go. We have already given drivers a quick and simple way to challenge an unfair contract at the Fair Work Commission.”
“Think about what this means in practice. When we build a road or a house, who do we want building it? When we pay for a hospital to be cleaned or for older Australians to be cared for, what kind of businesses do we want on the other end of that contract? I want it to be the one that looks after their workers, not the one whose priority is to undercut their workers if they think being able to do that gets them a government contract because they are paying their workers less. When taxpayers are footing the bill they are entitled to expect quality delivered by people who are treated decently. Value for money and on-time delivery are our priorities. But let's be clear. Businesses who do the right thing by their workers are the ones delivering value for money.”
“It doesn't compel the Commonwealth to do anything, but it gives us the option. How and when we use it is being worked through carefully through the secure Australian jobs code. As a responsible government, we are taking the time to get it right. I sat through a few enterprise agreement negotiations myself in my years at the United Workers Union. Done properly, they work for everyone in the room, providing security and fair conditions for workers as well as flexibility and productivity for business. They work precisely because both sides have hammered them across the table in good faith. That is what makes them one of the best tools we have. And it is worth saying plainly that an employer who signs an enterprise agreement is signing up to better pay and conditions for their people. That is the whole point.”
“Every year we invest in everything from construction to transport to security to catering to IT to the care of our loved ones. There is no bigger buyer of goods and services anywhere in Australia. So this bill asks a fair question: when we spend all that money, what kind of work are we paying for, and what is the standard we seek to set? Every dollar is a choice, and I think we should spend hours investing in the employers who are doing the right thing—those who pay properly and who sit down with their workers in good faith to secure genuine agreements. Australians want their government to set the example. They do not want their money fuelling a race to the bottom. So this bill lets us use our purchasing power to promote fairer wages and more-secure jobs through enterprise agreements where it makes sense to do so.”
“When we came to office, insecure work was already on the rise, and for years it had been allowed to spread, as if that was just how things worked: casual jobs that were permanent in everything but name and came without the entitlements that should have gone with them; contracts that loaded every risk onto the worker; wages that went nowhere while the price of everything went up. None of that was by accident; it was a choice—one that those opposite made year after year—to leave working people with less power and fewer protections. It is a choice we are undoing, piece by piece, and this bill is the next piece. When government puts the nation's money to work it should make sure that the money backs secure jobs and a workplace relations system that protects the fair go. The Australian government is the biggest customer in the country.”
“A secure job changes everything. It is the difference between building a life and just getting by. It is what lets someone take out a mortgage without laying awake over it or decide that it's finally the right time to start a family. When your job is secure, you stop bracing for next month. You can actually plan for it. This is what people want. It's not much when you think about it, a fair day's pay and a job you can count on. That is what the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Building Cooperative Workplaces No. 1) Bill 2026 sets out to deliver.”
“The nurse at the medical centre, the tradie in Keilor East, the hospo worker pulling a late night shift at Moonee Ponds—every single one. For the worker on the average wage in my electorate that is hundreds of dollars back in their pocket. And it doesn't stop there: a $1,000 instant tax deduction; reforms to level the playing field for first home buyers; cheaper early learning and care for young families; seeing the doctor for free; paying less tax and keeping more of what you earn. This is the difference. Some offer outrage. We offer outcomes.”
“Last week I stopped by the Essendon Health Medical Centre, one of the many clinics across Maribyrnong that is now fully bulk-billing. In fact, under our government, we have doubled the number of GP clinics across Maribyrnong that have moved to full bulk-billing. Let me tell you what this means. It means a mum can take her sick kid to the doctor without having to think about checking her bank balance. A tradie in Niddrie gets the care that they need with just their Medicare card, not their credit card. That's real relief in real clinics for real families. But bulk-billing is just one piece of a larger story. We know that people are watching every dollar that they spend. That's why, from 1 July, every worker in Maribyrnong is getting a tax cut.”
“The nurse, the tradie, the early childhood worker—this country couldn't run without them. Right now, too many of them are working harder than ever and feeling like they can't get ahead. Well, in our government, we see them; we hear them. And today I was proud to support our tax reforms. They will deliver another tax cut to every tradie, every hospo worker, every early childhood educator—”
“It is a promise that the people of my community still believe in, even though, for too long now, many have watched it quietly slip out of reach for them while they hold up their end of the bargain. Well, today, the Albanese Labor government restores its end of the bargain. This is the kind of reform that governments talk about and flinch from and that gets put in the too-hard basket election after election. But this Albanese Labor government is getting it done.”
“Australia has always been a country of aspiration and opportunity, a country that holds true to a simple promise. In decades past that promise was realised on the factory floors in Airport West and along the railway line that stretches from Kensington to Glenroy. It was the promise idealised by the migrant families who came with nothing but courage and built our north-western suburbs of Melbourne out of sheer hope and hard work. The promise was simple: if you work hard and if you do the right thing by your family and the community, then this country will give you a fair go back, a home, a sense of security, a life a little better than the one before. That is a promise I grew up believing in.”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government dealing with the immediate challenges facing Australia while building our resilience for the future? What are the alternative approaches?”
“This bill also makes sure the systems that businesses and consumers rely on to verify who they're dealing with are accurate, secure, modern and, above all else, trustworthy. It fixes a legislative hangover from a failed expensive program that the former coalition government left behind. It gives ASIC the tools it needs to do its job, while delivering meaningful reform that makes it harder for bad-faith actors to defraud and exploit honest businesses and working people. That is worthy thing for this parliament to do, and I'm proud that this government is getting on and doing it. I commend the bill to the House.”
“With this legislation in place, ASIC will deliver new company search services later this year. In 2027, new company registration services will launch, and the director ID regime will be formally linked to the company's register by 1 July 2027. Looking further ahead, the stabilised register will also be the platform on which this government delivers beneficial ownership reforms that will shine a light on who truly owns and controls Australian companies, rather than just who appears to on the paperwork. That work can only proceed once the registers are stabilised and modernised. This bill makes it possible. This is a bill about getting the basics right. It is about making sure Australia's core economic infrastructure is fit for purpose and reflects the modern society it operates in.”
“The Treasury conducted public consultation on the draft legislation from December 2025 through to February this year. The feedback was overwhelmingly supportive. Stakeholders across business, the legal profession and civil society recognised the value of what this legislation does. There was particular and strong support for the director ID-linking provisions, as many submissions highlighted the importance of these changes for cybersecurity and antifraud efforts. That broad support reflects that fact that, unlike the failed program it replaces, this legislation has been developed through genuine engagement with the people it affects. This bill sits alongside a broader set of reforms that the Albanese Labor government has made since coming into office, and it is the foundation on which the next phase of work will be built.”
“If the consumer is worried about whether a company is legitimate, they will have more information to make that judgement. In the situation where ASIC is investigating potential misconduct, they will have better tools to follow the money and identify the people responsible. This bill also includes integrity measures to ensure that directors are aware of and consented to their appointment at the point of linking. This directly addresses a real problem. There are too many instances where individuals have found themselves listed as directors of companies without their knowledge. This is a gateway to identity theft and fraud. These measures slam shut that loophole. As a responsible government, this bill did not emerge from nothing.”
“It requires companies to report director ID information to ASIC for all of their directors at the point of registration, through the annual review process and whenever director details change. That information will then be linked to and published on the company's register so that anyone, whether that be a prospective business partner, a consumer, a journalist or a regulator, can verify who is actually behind a company and trace their connections across corporate entities. This is a genuine structural reform to how corporate transparency works in Australia. Next time a business is considering a major contract with a new supplier, they'll be able to check whether the directors of that supplier have a history of failed companies.”
“Since November 2021, directors of Australian companies have been required to hold a director ID. That is a unique, lifelong identifier used by Australian Business Registry Services and administered by the tax office. Three million directors now hold one. The director ID regime was designed to address a specific and serious problem: the ability of bad actors to use false identities to set up companies, strip assets and disappear. But a director ID only works if it is visible. Right now, the information sits with the tax office and is not linked to the ASIC companies register. Despite this being the register that businesses and the public actually use when they want to check who is running a company, the two systems do not talk to each other, and that gap is where fraudsters hide. Schedule 1 closes that gap.”
“These changes will make it simpler and more efficient for companies and individuals to deal with ASIC, again reducing red tape in a way that actually brings about meaningful change. Third, the bill gives ASIC appropriate powers to correct errors on registers, disclose information in the public interest and, in limited but important circumstances, deregister companies where false or misleading information has been provided. In an environment where fraud and misuse of corporate structures is a genuine growing concern, that last power is particularly significant. But schedule 1 is perhaps the most significant part of the bill. It is the part that I think will deliver the greatest long-term benefit for businesses, for consumers and for the integrity of our corporate system.”
“This is a privacy and safety measure. Right now, the home addresses of company directors are publicly visible on the register. For most directors, this is probably a minor inconvenience, but, for some, including those facing domestic violence situations, those who've received threats and those in sensitive professions, it is a genuine safety risk. This change gives those individuals meaningful protection without reducing the transparency and accountability that the register provides. Second, the bill expands ASIC's capacity to interact with businesses and individuals electronically. In 2026 there is no reason why routine interactions with a government regulator should require paper forms and postal mail.”
“As I mentioned earlier, without this repeal, those provisions would make Australian Business Registry Services, a body created for a cancelled program, responsible for registers. ASIC would lose the authority it needs to continue the important work it has been doing. The RegistryConnect program would be thrown into disarray, causing costs to blow out and key deliverables to be delayed. Schedule 3 simply ensures that that doesn't happen. It confirms what the government decided in 2023: ASIC is responsible for these registers and ASIC will continue to administer and uplift them. Schedule 2 is the part of the bill that gives ASIC the powers it needs to do its job properly in the modern era. First, it allows directors to use an alternative address for service rather than their home addresses when their details are listed on the register.”
“These registers are critical national economic infrastructure, and, for too long, they have been running on technology that is decades out of date and increasingly at risk. That is why our government is fixing that. Since December 2023, we have committed $527.2 million to stabilise and uplift the registers under ASIC's leadership. That program, known as RegistryConnect, is on time and on budget. In fact, it's already delivering results, but, to keep it on track, we need this legislation. The bill has three schedules. Schedule 3 is the most urgent. It repeals provisions left over from the failed Modernising Business Registers program that are set to automatically commence on 1 July 2026.”
“Before working through what this bill does, it is worth also stepping back and understanding why we need these registers. Australian business registers are, in many respects, critical to our commercial economy. When Australians look up a company to check whether it's legitimate, they're using a business register. When a bank assesses a loan application or when a regulator investigates misconduct or even when a small business checks whether its supplier actually exists, they are using a business register. They are established under statute, administered by independent regulators and, unlike many other data sources, carry legal weight. They are an authoritative source of truth and generate around $1.2 billion in annual revenue for the Commonwealth, underpinning our business tax collection system.”
“We cancelled the Modernising Business Registers Program and committed to a new, pragmatic and better managed approach, one led by ASIC and focused on delivering actual outcomes for Australian businesses. I make this point because it explains the reasoning for what we are talking about today. The former government did not just waste money; it left a legislative time bomb. Unless this parliament acts before 30 June 2026, provisions from that failed program will automatically commence on 1 July 2026. Those provisions would transfer legal responsibility for Australia's business registers away from ASIC and hand it to a different body entirely: a registrar established for a program that no longer exists. That would be a bureaucratic and operational disaster, and this bill prevents that from happening.”
“The ambition to consolidate 30 of Australia's business registers into one was, in principle, a sensible idea. However, the execution was anything but. Year after year, the costs ballooned while deadlines were consistently missed. In what has become a defining legacy of the former coalition government, promises were made to businesses and regulators that amounted to nothing. By the time the independent Rees review examined the program in 2023, the findings were damning. The costs had escalated so dramatically that they would far outweigh the benefits that any program might deliver. In the end, the review recommended cessation. The program was a complete failure. In August 2023, this government made the difficult but responsible decision to pull the plug.”
“One of the responsibilities that comes with government is inheriting the consequences of decisions you didn't make. Sometimes that means fixing what was broken before you arrived, and that is what this bill is seeking to do. It is the result of this government choosing to get on with the job of identifying areas that need fixing and then moving forward with reforms that make them better. That is what the Treasury Laws Amendment (Business Registries Stabilisation and Uplift) Bill 2026 represents, and I'm proud to make a contribution to this debate. To appreciate why we are making these changes, I think it's worth understanding what came before. In 2020, the former coalition government launched what it called the Modernising Business Registers Program.”
“We built it because we believe in an Australia that is grounded in fairness and kindness, and we are reforming the NDIS now, with this bill, because that belief carries with it responsibility not just to build something good but also to protect it, to make sure it lasts, to make sure it is still there, stronger, better and fairer for the next generation of Australians who will need it. The coalition had their chance to be stewards of this scheme. They squandered it. This government will not make the same mistake. We are making the tough decisions that the moment demands and with the care that Australians with disability deserve. I commend the bill to the House.”
“Despite what others have said, we are not pulling the rug out from under anyone. We are building a stronger floor. I want to return to where I began—to the royal commission, to more than 8,000 people who gave their testimony, often at great personal cost, because they wanted to make a difference. That commission found systemic failures across governance, across institutions and across decades, but it also found something else: Australians with disability are not asking for sympathy, they are simply asking for a system that works, one that is there when they need it, with support that is real, not promised, and a future that they can plan for. Labor built the NDIS. We built it because we believe in a country where the circumstances of your birth, including the presence of disability, should not determine or limit your life.”
“My office has heard from people in my community on the NDIS that often contact us because the red tape is just too much to juggle along with caring arrangements, and, for many, they just reach their limit. This bill seeks to make their lives easier. The fourth is governance and pricing. The bill improves the governance arrangements around pricing decisions within the scheme, ensuring that pricing is transparent, fair and drives quality. Providers who deliver excellent support should be rewarded; providers who deliver poor support at inflated prices should not be. The fifth is transitional arrangements. The bill includes careful provisions to manage the transition to a new framework, protecting existing participants and ensuring no-one falls through the cracks as reforms are implemented.”