Tom French
Moore · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“I rise to speak in support of the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. At its centre, this bill is about whether a kid growing up outside capital cities can look at university, TAFE or any form of tertiary education and see a real path rather than a distant idea.”
“That is not always an exciting word, but it is a necessary one. For too long, parts of the higher education policy have been pulled towards short term politics, institutional competition and funding settings that do not always meet national needs.”
“It can go to academic support. It can go to scholarships and grants. It can help meet the higher cost of operating campuses outside the major cities. In this bill, the base equity amount is $1,535 and the base regional amount is $1,398.”
“That is why I'm less interested in reciting every number in the legislation and more interested in what those numbers mean when they land in a family living room in a regional town. They mean a student in Merriwa does not have to see university as something for other people.”
“I know the value of a trade, and I know that university is not the only path to a good life, and it should never be treated as the only respectable path. A good tertiary system is not university versus TAFE. It is not degree versus trade.”
“In plain English, that means we're moving to a system where growth in university places is planned and funded more sensibly. The Australian Tertiary Education Commission will have a formal role in allocating Commonwealth supported places.”
The complete record
Every one of 690 lines we hold for Tom French, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 14.
“The cost of living remains the dominant issue in conversations with households across the country. Energy bills are part of that pressure. Families feel it across Australia. The same is true in my electorate of Moore. From Karrinyup through to Duncraig, Sorrento, Hillarys and Mullaloo, households are conscious of electricity costs and what they mean for the weekly budget. Electricity is not a discretionary expense. It powers lights, refrigeration, heating, cooling and communication. Reliable and affordable power is therefore essential. When we talk about household energy policy, it is important to place the discussion in the broader economic context. When this government came to office, the economic starting point was challenging. We inherited significant deficits, a trillion dollars of debt, high inflation and falling real wages.”
“The amendments before the House ensure that the scheme continues to operate in accordance with that principle. They provide a pathway for resolving historical levy liabilities that have arisen following litigation. They ensure that service performed by workers within the industry can be properly recognised. They also strengthen the compliance framework that supports the financial sustainability of the scheme. In doing so, the legislation reinforces a principle that has long been recognised in Australian industrial law: that service to an industry should be acknowledged even where employment occurs across multiple employers over time. The portable long service leave scheme for the coalmining industry is an expression of that principle. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House.”
“Where the courts clarify the meaning of legislation, parliament must address the administrative consequences that follow from those decisions. The amendments contained in this bill perform that function. They ensure that the portable long service leave scheme continues to recognise service across the industry while addressing the practical issues that have arisen through litigation and the passage of time. The portable long service leave scheme has been a longstanding feature of employment regulation in the coalmining industry. It reflects an understanding that the structure of that industry requires a different approach to recognising long service. By allowing entitlements to accrue across employers, the scheme ensures that workers who move between projects or operators are not disadvantaged as a result of that mobility.”
“I grew up in regional New South Wales and, like many families in mining communities, I have relatives who worked in coal mines. In places like the Hunter Valley, the mining industry has been a defining feature of local economic and social life. Workers have spent decades in and around mine sites undertaking demanding and highly skilled work. Long service leave in that context has always represented recognition of sustained service under those conditions. It acknowledges the years that workers devote to the industry and the communities that depend upon it. In circumstances such as these, the role of parliament is to ensure that the statutory framework governing those entitlements continues to operate effectively.”
“The amendments replace that outdated reference with a contemporary rate published by the Reserve Bank, ensuring that the compliance provisions of the legislation continue to function as intended. These amendments will have practical consequences across Australia's major coal producing regions. Workers in the Hunter Valley, Illawarra, Central Queensland, Mackay and Whitsundays regions are among those whose entitlements may be affected by the operation of the scheme. These regions have long been central to Australia's coal industry and remain important centres of employment and economic activity. For many communities in those regions, coalmining has shaped generations of working life. This is also something that resonates with my own background.”
“Where that has occurred, the legislation allows these payments to be taken into account when determining outstanding liabilities so that employers are not required to duplicate payments in respect of the same entitlement. The bill corrects a technical defect affecting the compliance framework of the scheme. The current legislation provides for an additional levy to apply where employers fail to make levy payments on time. The purpose of the additional levy is to encourage compliance with payment obligations. However, the statutory formula presented refers to a reference interest rate that is no longer published by the Reserve Bank of Australia. As a consequence, the mechanism does not operate as it was originally intended.”
“In this way, the absence of historical documentation will not prevent workers from accessing benefits that correspond to their period of service in the industry. Alongside these measures, the bill also establishes a framework through which employers can regularise their position within the scheme in a manner that supports its continued financial viability. Payment arrangements may extend over several years and will be subject to the oversight of the scheme administrator. The legislation also recognises that in some circumstances employers may have previously paid long service leave entitlements directly to employees outside the scheme.”
“Workers remain entitled to full recognition of their service in the industry for the purpose of calculating long service leave. The bill also addresses the practical issue of historical record keeping. Some of the liabilities identified through the litigation extend well beyond the seven-year period for which employers are generally required to retain employment records. In many cases it may therefore be difficult to reconstruct precise payroll data for earlier periods. The legislation recognises this practical reality. It allows reasonable assumptions to be made in circumstances where records are incomplete so that service can still be recognised for the purpose of determining entitlements.”
“It is within that context that the amendments contained in this bill operate. Employers will have the opportunity to enter into voluntary payment arrangements with the scheme administrator. These arrangements allow outstanding levy liabilities to be repaid over an extended period. The legislation also provides for a limited remission of a portion of historical liabilities where employers comply with these arrangements. The intention is to create an incentive for employers to regularise their position within the scheme and to resolve outstanding liabilities within the defined timeframe. It is important to emphasise that these provisions do not reduce the entitlements of workers. Any remission relates to the employer's levy liability rather than the entitlement of employees under the scheme.”
“At the same time, workers whose service has not previously been recorded within the scheme may have periods of employment that have not been recognised for the purpose of calculating their long service leave entitlement. It should also be understood that the payment framework established by this legislation is not intended to reward avoidance of obligations. It is intended to resolve historical disputes and restore the proper operation of the scheme. The expectation is that employers operating in the black-coal mining industry will comply not only with the letter of the legislation but with its purpose—ensuring that workers' long service leave entitlements are properly funded. The legislation establishes a structured pathway through which historical levy liabilities may be addressed.”
“Whatever the legal arguments may have been at the time, the consequence of those decisions was that workers' service was not recorded within the scheme. The consequences of that clarification extend beyond the parties to the litigation. Where employers have previously taken the view that particular workers fell outside the scheme, levies may not have been paid in respect of those employees. The clarification provided by the courts therefore creates the possibility of historical levy liabilities arising for earlier periods. In some cases those liabilities extend back for many years. The existence of those historical liabilities presents practical challenges. Employers may face significant retrospective obligations.”
“It is coordinated with production schedules and with safety systems operating across the mine site. The litigation required the court to examine the statutory definition of eligible employee and the manner in which that definition interacts with the coverage provisions of the Black Coal Mining Industry Award. In resolving those issues, the court clarified aspects of the scheme's coverage and the circumstances in which employees performing work at coalmines may fall within the statutory framework. It must be said that many employers complied with the scheme in good faith throughout that period. Others, however, adopted a far narrower view of the legislation and chose not to contribute levies while those disputes were being tested through the courts.”
“Those issues were ultimately considered by the Federal Court in a series of proceedings, including Hitachi Construction Machinery (Australia) Pty Limited v Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation and Orica Australia Pty Ltd v Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation. The Orica litigation provides a useful illustration of the issues that arose. That matter concerned employees engaged in shot-firing activities at open-cut coalmines. Shot firing involves the controlled detonation of explosives to remove, overburden and expose coal seams for extraction. The Federal Court noted that the process of shot firing is closely integrated with the extraction of coal and forms part of the operational sequence through which mining takes place.”
“Importantly, the act adopts the meaning of the black-coal mining industry contained in the Black Coal Mining Industry Award 2010. The award definition includes the extraction of coal, the processing and transportation of coal on a mining lease, and other work directly related with these activities. The interaction with the statutory definition and the award coverage provisions has, over time, been the subject of litigation. In particular, a number of employers disputed whether certain categories of workers fell within the scope of the scheme. Those disputes often involved contractors performing specialist services at or around coalmines. In some cases, employers argued that these services were ancillary to mining operations and therefore outside the statutory concept of employment in the black-coal mining industry.”
“The government's Fair Work Amendment (Same Job, Same Pay) Bill 2021 was introduced to ensure that labour hire arrangements are not used to undermine wages and conditions negotiated through enterprise bargaining. The same underlying principle applies here. The structure of employment should not be used as a device to avoid the obligations that arise from work performed in the industry. That act establishes the entitlement and defines who is an eligible employee for the purposes of the scheme. The legislative framework underpinning that system is set out principally in the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Administration Act 1992. The statutory definition incorporates workers employed in the black-coal mining industry whose duties are directly connected with the day-to-day operation of the coalmine.”
“The Commonwealth scheme addresses that problem by allowing long service leave to accrue based upon service within the industry itself. Employers contribute to the scheme through a payroll levy paid into a central account. Service records are maintained by the scheme administrator, and, when a worker becomes entitled to long service leave, the employer is reimbursed from the fund. The practical effect is that a worker's mobility within the industry does not deprive them of the entitlement that would otherwise arise from long periods of service. This principle—that workers should not lose their entitlements simply because of contracting structures or labour hire arrangements—is consistent with the broader industrial reforms this parliament has undertaken.”
“To understand the significance of these amendments, it is necessary to briefly consider the purpose of the portable long service leave scheme itself. The long service leave arrangements that apply in the black-coal mining industry reflect a longstanding feature of employment in the sector. Coalmining is an industry characterised by movement of labour between sites, between contractors and between operators. Workers often spend decades in the industry, yet their employment may be spread across multiple employers during that time. In those circumstances, a traditional model of long service leave that relies upon continuous employment with a single employer does not adequately recognise the reality of working life in the industry.”
“I rise to speak in support the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. This bill amends two pieces of Commonwealth legislation: the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Administration Act 1992 and the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Payroll Levy Collection Act 1992. The amendments address two matters that have arisen over the time in the operation of the portable long service leave scheme for the black-coal mining industry. The first concerns historical levy liabilities that have accumulated following disputes about the scope of the scheme. The second concerns the operation of the additional levy that applies where levy payments are made late. Each of these matters goes directly to the integrity of the scheme and to the ability of workers to access entitlements that the law provides.”
“They depend on secure employment. They depend on investment in skills, infrastructure and productivity. This government is investing in apprenticeships, training, and industry capability to strengthen Australia's economic foundations, because sustainable living standards come from a stronger economy, not from political slogans. Economic crises revealed the difference between careful governance and a reckless opposition. That is why, when it comes to managing crises and protecting the living standards of Australians, Labor's record speaks for itself.”
“Budget discipline deteriorated despite repeated promises for stronger fiscal management. And when crisis emerged, the response was often chaotic or delayed. Crisis management in government is not about rhetoric; it is about making difficult decisions with long-term consequences in mind. It requires steady leadership, it requires responsible fiscal policy, and it requires an understanding that wellbeing of households ultimately depends on stability of the broader economy. The Albanese government has demonstrated that discipline. It has stabilised inflation while maintaining strong employment. It has delivered relief while repairing the budget, and it has done so without compromising the long-term health of the economy. Ultimately, living standards are determined more than short-term price pressures. They depend on wages growth.”
“Cheaper medicines have reduced the cost of essential prescriptions, student debt has been reduced through reforms to indexation, we've introduced paid prac to nursing and teaching students, and tax cuts have been delivered to every taxpayer. Each of these measures was targeted. Each was designed to ease pressure without destabilising the broader economy. The opposition invites the House to believe they would have somehow managed these challenges better, yet their own record demonstrates the opposite. When faced with economic pressure, the Liberal Party has consistently prioritised short-term politics over long-term stability. During their time in government, wages stagnated. Real wages went backwards for years. They never put in any claims to increase the wages of Australia's lowest paid on the awards, and productivity slowed.”
“It meant repairing the budget rather than reckless promises. It meant providing cost-of-living relief that did not fuel inflation further. It meant strengthening structural foundations of the economy. As a result, Australia's inflation is lower than when we came to office. Wages have been growing and employment remains historically strong. That outcome was not accidental. It was the result of careful economic management. The government has also provided direct relief where it has mattered most. Apprentices have been supported with $10,000 bonuses to help build the homes we need. That includes electricians, plumbers and bricklayers.”
“The cost-of-living pressures that Australians have experienced did not arise in isolation. They followed the most significant economic disruption in generations, a pandemic, supply chain breakdowns, energy price shocks and a surge in global inflation. Every advanced economy confronted the same pressures. Inflation has surged across Europe, North America and Asia. Energy prices have spiked. Housing markets have tightened, supply chains have fractured. In short, the entire global economy has been under strain. Responsible governments recognised this reality and acted carefully to stabilise their economies while protecting households. The Albanese government approached this challenge with a simple principle: economic stability first, targeted relief second. That approach required discipline.”
“I rise to address the motion concerning the decline in Australia's living standards due to what the opposition repeatedly describes as a cost-of-living crisis. Let us begin with a simple proposition. Every government is ultimately judged not by the slogan it repeats but by how it manages the moments when circumstances become difficult—not mugs for mugs, anyway. Economic shocks, global instability and sudden price pressures test a nation's institutions. They test governments most of all. The question before this House is therefore not whether Australians have faced cost-of-living pressures; they clearly have. The question is: which side of politics has demonstrated the competence, discipline and seriousness required to manage those pressures responsibly?”
“It preserves concessional treatment for the overwhelming majority of Australians. It modestly recalibrates concessions at the extreme upper end. It strengthens support for low-income workers and it continues Labor's long history of building and improving superannuation so that it works for working people. For those of us who remember insecure work under WorkChoices—earning less than $10 an hour and responsible for paying our own superannuation out of that wage—the importance of a strong, enforceable and universal superannuation system is not theoretical; it is lived experience. It should be paid as it is earned, it should be preserved for retirement, and the concessions that support it should be equitable and sustainable. This legislation advances that purpose. I commend the bills to the House.”
“Workers who stand to benefit include over 100,000 sales assistants, over 50,000 administrative workers and over 50,000 carers for the aged and disabled. Over a working life, the boost could translate to around $15,000 in additional retirement savings. There are 14 times as many people who will benefit from the LISTO boost as there are people with super balances above $3 million. Schedule 4 is estimated to decrease the underlying cash balance by $435 million over the forward estimates. Some revenue gained from better targeting concessions at the top is directed towards strengthening retirement outcomes for low-income workers. Taken together, these measures reinforce the legislated objective of superannuation to preserve savings to deliver income for a dignified retirement, alongside government support, in an equitable and sustainable way.”
“But this legislation is not solely about recalibrating concessions at the top; it is also about strengthening support at the bottom. Schedule 4 enhances the low-income superannuation tax offset, the LISTO. The eligibility threshold has remained at $37,000 since 2020-21, despite changes in income tax brackets. As a result, workers earning between $37,000 and $45,000 have received no LISTO payment. From 1 July 2027, the threshold increases to $45,000. The maximum payment increases to $810 to reflect the 12 per cent superannuation guarantee. Because of these changes, around 770,000 additional Australians become eligible for LISTO. Around 490,000 receive a higher payment. In total, around 1.3 million Australians benefit. Approximately 60 per cent of those are women.”
“The measure is expected to affect less than half of one per cent of Australians with superannuation accounts in 2026-27. The higher rate, above $10 million, applies to an even smaller subset. Schedules 1 to 3 are estimated to increase receipts by approximately $2.15 billion over five years. In a system where concessions are projected to grow substantially over time, this is a modest but meaningful recalibration that contributes to long-term sustainability. Superannuation exists to provide income for a dignified retirement. It does not exist to provide unlimited concessional treatment for very large balances functioning as tax-preferred wealth stores. Even after these changes, concessional treatment remains generous relative to many personal marginal tax rates.”
“The definition of 'total superannuation balance' has been refined so that all Australian superannuation interests are counted, with appropriate exclusions such as foreign superannuation funds. Regulation-making powers allow for valuation methods that reflect the diversity of superannuation products and schemes. These are sensible exclusions. Child recipients of superannuation income streams are excluded from division 296 tax. Individuals who have received structured settlement contributions for personal injury are excluded, recognising the purpose of these large contributions. This reform reflects more than two years of consultation and refinement. Practical changes announced in October 2025 have been incorporated. The design leverages existing reporting systems to minimise compliance burdens, while achieving the policy objective.”
“At the fund level, division 296 fund earnings are calculated by reference to the relevant taxable income or loss, adjusted for assessable contributions, net exempt current pension income, non-arms-length components and pooled superannuation trust components. The legislation contains specific rules addressing segregated current pension assets to ensure that capital gains supporting retirement-phase interests are appropriately included for division 296 purposes. It provides tailored rules for pooled superannuation trusts and retirement savings account providers, including life insurers, to ensure consistent treatment across different superannuation structures.”
“If the TSB exceeds $10 million, an additional calculation identifies the very large superannuation balance earnings component so that the higher rate applies only to the portion above that second threshold. The division 296 tax is imposed directly on the individual. Individuals may pay from outside super or elect to release funds from their superannuation. Defined benefit increases are treated in a commensurate fashion. For defined benefit interests not in retirement phase, liabilities may be deferred until retirement—with interest. That recognises structural differences while preserving equity across the system.”
“Superannuation funds will calculate division 296 fund earnings attributable to each in-scope member and report those amounts to the ATO. The mechanics are detailed but principled. First, an individual's total superannuation balance, their TSB, is identified. The greater of the TSB, at the end of the income year or just before the start of the year, is used to prevent avoidance through temporary balance reductions. Second, the proportion of TSB above the $3 million threshold is calculated. That proportion is applied to the individual's total superannuation earnings for the year to determine taxable superannuation earnings for division 296 purposes.”
“It does not reclassify an entire balance once the threshold is crossed. The additional tax applies only to the proportion of earnings corresponding to the proportion of the balances above the relevant threshold. Both the $3 million and the $10 million thresholds are indexed to CPI. That indexation ensures that reform maintains its real value over time and does not gradually expand beyond its intent through inflation alone. The reform operates through the insertion of new division 296 into the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, with the accompanying imposition bill imposing the relevant tax. Under division 296, the Commissioner of Taxation will calculate and assess each individual's division 296 tax liability annually.”
“A substantial portion of concessional treatment flows to individuals with very large balances—balances far in excess of what is required for a comfortable retirement. This standard addresses that imbalance in a measured way. From the 2026-27 income year, earnings on superannuation balances below $3 million will continue to be taxed at 15 per cent. Nothing changes for balances under that threshold. For more than 99.5 per cent of all Australians, the tax treatment of their super remains exactly the same. For the proportion of earnings attributable to balances between $3 million and $10 million, the effective headline rate will be up to 30 per cent. For the proportion attributable to balances above $10 million, the effective headline rate will be up to 40 per cent. It is important to emphasise the structure. This is not a cliff.”
“It must not depend on artificial classifications that shift responsibility onto workers—or come out of a fever dream from the member for Goldstein—and it must be paid as it is earned, which is precisely why payday super matters. The bills before the House today continue that work of strengthening and safeguarding the system. Superannuation tax concessions now cost the budget more than $60 billion each year. On current projections, they will exceed the cost of the age pension in the 2040s. Concessions are not a flaw. They are part of the architecture of compulsory saving, but their scale and distribution must reflect the system's purpose. Currently, around 38 per cent of super earnings concessions go to the top 10 per cent of earners. Around 54 per cent go to the top 20 per cent.”
“There were no employer contributions automatically set aside, and if I did not make contributions myself nothing accumulated. But when you're earning less than $10 an hour, the priority is paying rent and buying groceries, not making retirement contributions. For many young workers at the time, superannuation was not automatic, it was not secure and it was not guaranteed. It depended on contractual labels and whether you could afford to sacrifice the income in the present for something decades away. For many it simply did not materialise. That experience reinforces why super must be compulsory and it must also apply to all earnings.”
“We've strengthened the performance test to protect members from underperforming funds eroding their savings. Each of these reforms reinforces the same principle: superannuation must be universal, enforceable and fair. I remember very clearly what happens when those principles are absent. During the Work Choices era, I worked in hospitality. I was working behind a bar engaged in what was described as being a subcontractor. In practice, I was an employee in all but name. I turned up for rostered shifts and I took direction, but legally I was classified as running my own business. I was earning less than $10 an hour, and, because I was treated as a subcontractor, I was responsible for paying my own superannuation out of that already meagre wage.”
“It was built on a simple but transformative idea that retirement dignity should be universal. Labor built this system, and Labor has continued to improve it. We introduced compulsory superannuation. We extended its reach across industries and employment types. We strengthened preservation. We resisted attempts to freeze or weaken it. In this term of government, we've increased the superannuation guarantee to 12 per cent. We've legislated the objective of superannuation, embedding in statute that the system exists to preserve savings and deliver income for a dignified retirement in an equitable and sustainable way. We've introduced payday super so workers receive their super at the same time as their wages rather than months later. We've ensured that super is paid on paid parental leave.”
“I rise to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026 and the accompanying Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026. These bills are about stewardship, but, if you had just witnessed that and listened to the member for Goldstein, I don't think you would know what the bill is about. They are about protecting one of the most important economic and social reforms in Australia's modern history and ensuring it remains aligned with its purpose for decades to come. Superannuation is not a theoretical construct. It is deferred wages. It is money earned by working Australians and preserved so that, when working life ends, they are not left dependent on chance, inheritance or bare subsistence.”
“On more than one mine site, the only reliable form of external connection was a payphone bolted to the wall of an accommodation block—a payphone! That was not nostalgia; that was necessity. If you walked out into the operational area beyond the camp, your phone would frequently show no service. If you were driving between regional towns, you knew precise sections of the road where reception would disappear—everyone knew. You planned around it. You told family, 'I'll call back once I'm in range.' You accepted it, but acceptance doesn't mean adequacy. It simply reflected the technological and commercial limits of terrestrial infrastructure at the time. It's true. I have the same problem when I talk to my mum in regional South Australia—the phone drops out all the time.”
“In a small, densely populated European nation, that gap might be marginal. In Australia, it is consequential. We are a continent. We have freight corridors stretching for hundreds of kilometres. We have pastoral leases larger than some countries. We have remote Indigenous communities. We've mining operations operating continuously far from urban centres. We've tourists travelling vast distances through remote landscapes. Connectivity gaps in that context are not abstract regulatory issues; they are lived experiences. Before I entered this place, I worked as an electrician across Western Australia, including on remote mine sites. Those sites were disciplined, safety-conscious workplaces, with risk assessments, toolbox meetings, radios and procedures. But mobile coverage was often limited or entirely absent.”
“That is not symbolic; it is structural and it reflects something fundamental. The way Australians communicate has changed dramatically. But, until now, the legal framework governing universal access has not fully caught up. In this building, we often refer to a statistic that approximately 99 per cent of Australians live and work in areas that have terrestrial mobile coverage. That is correct, but that statistic only tells part of the story. Geographically, traditional terrestrial coverage extends across roughly one-third of Australia's landmass. Two-thirds of the continent sits beyond conventional tower infrastructure. That means there are millions of square kilometres where, if you are standing outside with a standard handset, you cannot make a call. In many of those areas, you cannot contact emergency services.”
“Another wild ride in the chamber! I rise to speak in support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. On its face, this appears to be a technical reform, a structural amendment to telecommunications legislation. But when you strip away the statutory language and regulatory framing, the underlying proposition is remarkably simple: in modern Australia, if you're standing outdoors, under an open sky, you should reasonably expect to be able to make a phone call or send a text message, not stream a film, not upload gigabytes of data, not conduct high-definition conferencing—just call or send a message. For the first time, mobile voice and SMS services will be brought within Australia's universal services framework.”
“We spoke about the importance of sustainable funding, the pressures on volunteer-run organisations, and the need to create more opportunities for local artists to develop and showcase their work. There was also a really strong and clear message about the need for fit-for-purpose infrastructure. As I said in my inaugural speech, culture is infrastructure, too. It was encouraging to see the level of support for that idea in the room. I'll continue to advocate for the kind of investment that ensures our local arts sector can not only survive but thrive, because, if we're serious about Joondalup as Western Australia's second CBD, we need to invest in the infrastructure that brings it to life, and that includes the arts.”
“It was a real pleasure to welcome to Joondalup the member for Macquarie, Susan Templeman, in her capacity as a special envoy to the arts on 25 March, and to bring together such a strong cross-section of our local arts community. We had representatives from the Peter Cowan Writers Centre, the Heathridge branch of the Woodturners Association of Western Australia, the Joondalup Symphony Orchestra, the Art Gallery of Western Australia, the Mirabilis Collective, the Creative Edge Art Collective, the Joondalup Community Arts Association and the City of Joondalup all in the room. What stood out to me was just how much talent, passion and commitment exists right here in our community, as well as the very real challenges the sector is facing.”
“Everywhere has received 22 awards across six continents, being broadcast nationally on SBS and named as a finalist for the Australian Sports Commission Media Awards alongside organisations such as the ABC and Tennis Australia. It was a pleasure to meet the members of the Periscope Crew at City of Joondalup citizenship ceremony on Australia Day, and together Motion by the Ocean and the Periscope Crew show what community leadership can achieve. Moore is richer for your contribution.”
“Founded in Sorrento in 2020, the Periscope Crew is a film collective of young people with disabilities aged 18 to 25, raised and educated in the City of Joondalup and are operating as part of the Perth based charity Soul Gestures. From the outset, they set out to change the conversation around disability inclusion by telling stories from every angle, working with organisations, sports clubs and local councils committed to building more inclusive communities. In 2023, the crew was selected as one of the film teams for the World Transplant Games held in Perth. That opportunity led to their documentary Everywhere , which highlights human connection, authentic inclusion and the life-changing value of organ donation.”
“These rides create space for dignity, conversation and shared experience, helping people stay connected to place and to one another. Motion by the Ocean has also expanded its outreach through programs such as Moving Food, which redistributes surplus food to community members in need. I've visited Motion by the Ocean community events, including the recent coastal storytelling sessions, and saw first-hand the warmth and the connection that they nurture. I also want to acknowledge the volunteers that bring this work to life. I also rise to celebrate the Periscope Crew and their mentors, who were winners of the 2026 City of Joondalup Young Community Citizen of the Year award.”
“I rise today to recognise two outstanding groups in my community of Moore, Motion by the Ocean, led by Alanagh Godderidge, and the Periscope Crew with their dedicated mentors. Motion by the Ocean exists to strengthen community connection and foster inclusion, ensuring people feel seen, valued and supported. Their mission is to deliver innovative, community based activities that meet unmet needs and create meaningful social connection while championing a community where everyone belongs. Their flagship program, Cycling Without Age Sorrento, offers West Australians pioneering free trishaw service, giving seniors and people with limited mobility the chance to enjoy fresh air, movement and connection along our coastline.”
“Cheaper medicines, expanded child care and energy rebates have reduced household pressure. That is not betrayal; that is disciplined management in difficult global conditions. In 1964, Donald Horne wrote The Lucky Country . It is often quoted as praise, but it was not; it was a warning. He warned of a nation run by second-rate people—I'm looking at you guys over there—who relied on luck rather than leadership, of shopkeepers and ticket clippers content to take margin from the system rather than build new capability. For too long, energy policy resembled ticket-clipping economics, defending ageing assets, delaying reform, avoiding hard decisions and hoping the market sorts it out. Energy markets do not reward hope; they reward planning.”