Alison Penfold
Lyne · National Party · Australia
“I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. I acknowledge the member for Moore and his time he spent in the wonderful community of Dungog. It is a terrific place and I know that the teachers and educators in that town do a wonderful job. Well done.”
“They can often live with their families while they study. For a young person growing up in Dungog, Taree, Wingham, Gloucester, Harrington, Tea Gardens, Bulahdelah, Forster, Tuncurry or the Manning Valley or the many other small towns and hamlets in my electorate—”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. Isn't it true that the Albanese Labor government's 70c-a-day tax cut has already been eaten up by inflation, unlike the coalition's tax-back guarantee, which is protected from inflation and would provide a typical Australian worker a far bigger, $400 tax cut this year?”
“My question is to the Treasurer. Yesterday the Treasurer was asked about his plan to force thousands of widows and divorcees to pay more tax by removing their access to grandfathering for capital gains tax and negative gearing.”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. A new report shows the Prime Minister saved around $200,000 on the sale of three investment properties under existing capital gains tax rules. In last month's budget, the Prime Minister broke his promise and changed those rules.”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. A new report shows the Prime Minister saved around $200,000 on the sale of three investment properties under existing capital gains tax rules. In last month's budget, the Prime Minister broke his promise and changed those rules.”
The complete record
Every one of 616 lines we hold for Alison Penfold, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 13.
“They've worked long hours, taken risks and gone without all in the hope that the next generation might have a better future. Before the election, Labor promised it wouldn't touch key tax settings like negative gearing and capital gains. Now those promises are gone. There is no fundamental difference between the challenges that existed at the last election just 12 months ago and the challenges that exist today that are barriers to young people getting into housing. So Labor's argument that you had to change your position is a big fraud. You said, 'For the 50th time, we won't make changes.' These were just words of convenience at election time.”
“Where's the fairness in driving up costs, pushing more people onto waiting lists and shifting the financial burden onto taxpayers and state governments? It is not just; it is unjust and it is deeply wrong. Let's turn to trusts and tax changes hidden in this budget. The government says it's about fairness again, stopping trusts from distributing income to family members. For many Australians, for many families, for farmers, for small businesses in regional Australia, trusts are not a loophole. They are a legitimate way to protect assets, to plan for the future and to pass on a legacy. Many people in Lyne have spent decades building a small business, running a farm, paying off a home and saving carefully so they can leave something behind for their children and grandchildren.”
“This is the largest premium hike in eight years, and it comes as Australians face the highest out-of-pocket costs to see a GP in Medicare's history—over $50 on average. All this is in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis made worse by budget mismanagement. The result is that every Australian forced out of private health puts more strain on our already stretched public hospitals. Manning in Taree, Port Macquarie, Maitland and John Hunter hospitals—these hospitals are the lifelines for our region, and the immense pressure they are already under has just been made much worse thanks to Labor. Labor says these cuts are about fairness, but where's the fairness in punishing those who paid taxes their whole lives and who took out private cover to ease the burden on public hospitals?”
“Lorraine said: This country, but especially the health system, is going backwards very quickly and we need to stop this decline before it gets to the point that to live in this town, or indeed Foster/Tuncurry is a danger to your life. I thought I was doing the right thing by always having private health insurance but now feel totally betrayed and misguided by this government. For many, private health insurance isn't a luxury. It's the only way they can get the surgery, the specialist treatment and the procedures that restore quality of life. The Howard government understood this, which is why it increased rebates for older Australians. The Albanese government's cuts mean couples over 65 could pay an extra $1,600 a year, a 21 per cent increase, and that's on top of a 4.4 per cent rise in premiums for everyone.”
“The door is closing on the next generation's hopes for investment and a secure retirement, thanks to the changes to capital gains and negative gearing. I've heard from constituents of all ages who are outraged, anxious and disillusioned. In my opinion, every regional Australian is a loser in this budget. For older Australians, the reduction of the private health insurance rebate has been nothing short of a stab in the back. Constituents in my electorate feel utterly betrayed by the government that has changed the rules mid-game. Joanne, who lives in Bolwarra, cannot fathom why, in a cost-of-living crisis, this government is making it harder for older Australians to access affordable health care.”
“The national water grid has been slashed by $103 million. That's money that could secure our water future with projects like the Kiwarrak off-river storage. Let's talk about health. You know I like this topic. The Albanese government has all but abandoned regional healthcare. From a $1.8 billion commitment to urgent care clinics, Taree, despite repeated evidence based requests, gets nothing, zero, zilch. Our aged-care system, already stretched to breaking point, receives a pittance that won't even make a dent in the Support at Home waiting list or fix the workforce crisis. Worse, our older Australians—those who have worked hard all their lives—are hit with a higher tax burden as their reward for decades of contribution, punished for aspiration, for paying off their homes and for doing the right thing. It doesn't stop with today's seniors.”
“All in all, just three items from Lyne's wish list were addressed, which I think most here would agree is pretty paltry in the scheme of things. It is pretty unsatisfactory for the hardworking, taxpaying people of Lyne to think that is all they are worth. Taken as a whole, this budget lets rural and regional people down big time. It's a budget that defunds regional Australia. It's as though Labor has drawn a line around metropolitan Labor seats and said, 'The rest of you: you'll have to make do.' Take a look at our roads. There's not a single cent for the critical upgrades and interchanges on the Pacific Highway our communities rely on for safety and growth. Telecommunications has been stripped of over $21 million in funding, making it even harder to fix mobile and internet black spots.”
“I spelled out, in no uncertain terms, the urgent needs of the communities and people of the Lyne electorate—for our roads, our telecommunications, our water security, our seniors and our children—and worked closely with communities and organisations across the electorate. What was the Albanese government's response? Well, we did get three things from the submission, and I'm grateful. We've got another round of the Stronger Communities Program, funding for the Growing Regions Program and funding for enabling infrastructure to unlock development-ready land for housing. Key issues were raised with me in a housing forum I held last year. No-one raised changing the CGT or negative gearing settings. What people were talking about were things like investing in power, water and sewerage, in enabling infrastructure.”
“Tonight I rise not just to speak about the appropriation bills but to give voice to the concerns, the frustrations and the hopes of the communities that are too often left behind—communities in the electorate of Lyne. Let's call this budget what it is: a patchwork of blunders that, when woven together, form a tapestry of neglect for rural and regional Australia. And the consequences are not abstract. They are lived, felt and endured by families, workers and small-business owners right across our electorates and beyond. Before this budget was handed down, I made a detailed prebudget submission.”
“It's pretty hard for me, let alone for my constituents, to have to sit here and hear colleagues on the other side get up and say, 'We're about to get our second,' or, 'We're about to get our third urgent care clinic.' Are we not Australians? Are we not equal citizens in the eyes of this government? We're an area of low socioeconomic means, an area of great need in terms of the number of GPs we have per head of population. The case I've made in terms of the challenges that we have at Manning Base Hospital—surely, the minister cannot ignore the need on the Mid North Coast. Surely he is not so cruel as to take joy in announcing more urgent care clinics in electorates that already have them while denying one for the people of the Mid North Coast. There are Labor members in the Lyne electorate. I think Labor got 20 per cent of the vote.”
“I'm so grateful that my colleague Tanya Thompson, the member for Myall Lakes, has been successful in securing state funding for an urgent care clinic under their model for Forster-Tuncurry. So she's fighting that battle, and I'm fighting for the federal funds to come for the urgent care clinic for Taree. I wrote to the Minister for Health and Ageing, the Hon. Mark Butler, after the announcement, prior to the budget, that there will be additional funding and they're locking in the urgent care clinic model, and I thanked the government for that commitment. But I asked him: 'Is there funding for Taree?' I can't be much clearer—I can't make the case any more clearly to him. Is the budget commitment providing funding for an urgent care clinic for Taree? As I've said, there is not a clinic between Coffs Harbour and Newcastle.”
“He enlightened me that, under a former coalition government, in the Howard years, we actually had an after-hours GP program that was funded, and he, in fact, had received that funding for his clinic to provide after-hours, fully-bulk-billed, no-appointment-needed care. And what he said to me, in two words, was: 'It worked'—it worked for the people of the Manning. That's from the horse's mouth—from somebody who knows the value of an urgent care clinic, not just for his own business but for the people of Taree and the Manning area. An urgent care clinic has worked in our area. We desperately need one now. And he agreed. In fact, I met another doctor, from a clinic in Tuncurry, only last week as well, and he too is impassioned about getting an urgent care clinic for the Forster-Tuncurry area.”
“I'll read what he said in this article: 'What we're actually getting after 10 years is an incomplete building that does not meet the original stage 2 plan to meet the needs of our area. It is disgusting—absolutely disgusting. We're already so short of beds, it's causing bed block.' So I want the parliament, the government and the minister for health to understand that my impassioned plea for an urgent care clinic is not just on the basis of having a service for T4 and T5. It is in the context of the serious concerns the community has about the state of health services in Taree and the area. Interestingly, I had a retired doctor come and speak to me only last week in the electorate. He had been a GP in the area for well over 40 years. He is now retired, but his career as a GP basically spanned a very significant part in our area.”
“I'll read from an article from the local paper: 'The community has waited more than five years for the promised stage 2 upgrade, but, since the administration building was demolished in July 2025, there appears to be no activity on site, and the health district has ignored questions regarding whether hospital bed numbers will be slashed from 112 to 84 and whether floors 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the existing hospital will be closed on completion.' The Manning Great Lakes Community Health Action Group and their president, Eddie Wood—and these are experienced health professionals, who are actively fighting for health services in our area—have raised these concerns and are bitterly disappointed about the response from the New South Wales Labor government and from the local health district.”
“When we, the Nationals, were in government in the New South Wales state parliament, we put aside a significant amount of money for redevelopment at what I'm still going to call Manning Base Hospital. Recently, there have been significant concerns in the community about the state of the redevelopment, and questions have been put to Hunter New England Local Health District about these concerns about the future of the stage 2 redevelopment, and, frankly, they have been less than forthcoming.”
“There are a lot of Birrbay and Warrimay people who live in the Lyne electorate, who live in and around Taree from a population of about 25,000 people across the greater Taree area. So it is not only for the broader population but also specifically for a population with a significant Aboriginal population. This is a facility that would be of significant benefit and use to them. The other context I want to give is the state of our public hospital in Taree. I grew up in and around Taree. As I've said, I went to school in Taree. We were very proud of Manning Base Hospital, back in those days. But I looked on NSW Health's site, and they don't even call it a base hospital anymore; it's now called Manning Hospital.”
“I went on to say in my pre-budget submission that redirecting even 30 to 50 per cent of those annual presentations to an urgent care clinic would remove 5,000 to 8½ thousand presentations per year from the ED. That's 13 to 23 per day on average. It would deliver notable noticeable improvements in ED capacity and wait times. That exact same language I have said in numerous letters to the minister, laying out the case for an urgent care clinic in my area. Let me give some more context. I know 'What about Taree?' is a bit of a catchcry in the parliament, and I know many people from across the chamber now know where Taree is, but I want to give some more context for why I'm so passionate about getting this facility in my electorate. Taree has an Indigenous population of some 12.7 per cent.”
“In my prebudget submission to the government back in January, under portfolio funding priorities for health, the Taree urgent care clinic was the No. 1 priority. I talked about what redirecting suitable T4 and T5 presentations to an urgent care clinic would mean. They would relieve pressure on the ED, and we can see that from those Maitland statistics. Free ED spaces and clinician time for high acuity presentations. Reduce overall waiting times and the of patients staying greater than four hours. Reduce ambulance offload delays by clearing ED capacity and reducing bottlenecks. Improve patient experience with faster treatment for low acuity problems in an Urgent Care Clinic model and make better use of workforce nurse practitioners' GP procedural skills. They can manage many of the T4-T5 problems at lower cost than an ED.”
“In the October-December 2025 period, 46 per cent of patients were T4 or T5—that's low acuity—to Manning Base Hospital, but the T2 treatments that were on time in terms of servicing were 35.1 per cent, and T3 had 39.2 per cent treatment on time. Now let me compare this to Maitland Hospital. Maitland has an urgent care clinic—in fact, it was a commitment that I made and my Liberal Party colleague in the seat of Paterson made at the last election. In comparison, at Maitland Hospital 39.6 per cent of presentations were T4 or T5, yet the T2 treatment on time was 79 per cent and T3 was 60.1 per cent. In those figures alone you can see the benefit to hospital ED when you have an urgent care clinic available for low acuity, for people that could go and see a GP if one were available.”
“They deserve a system that supports them and protects them from those who seek to exploit the scheme for profit. That is why many Australians will be looking closely at whether this bill genuinely cracks down on organised fraud and criminal behaviour or whether much of the burden of reform instead falls on participants and families already struggling to navigate the system. As legislators, we have a responsibility to get this balance right to protect taxpayers' money, to protect the integrity of the scheme and, also, to protect the people that the scheme was created to serve.”
“True sustainability also means maintaining trust that genuine participants will be treated fairly, that vulnerable Australians will not be abandoned, that the system will remain centred on people rather than bureaucracy and that governments are targeting the real causes of waste and exploitation, not simply making it harder for vulnerable people to access support. Australians with disabilities should never be made to feel like they are the problem. The overwhelming majority of participants are honest people trying to live their lives with dignity. The overwhelming majority of carers are doing extraordinary work under immense pressure, and many providers are deeply committed people that deliver essential support in difficult circumstances.”
“With them refusing kids entry without a possible alternative program to put them into immediately, they are creating a group of children who will probably remain in a gap between services or will never receive services and create a group of disadvantaged children for some time. None of this means reform should not occur. Reform is necessary. The scheme must be sustainable. If costs continue to grow unchecked, future governments will face impossible choices. And, if fraud and waste continue to undermine confidence, the social licence that underpins the NDIS will weaken. But sustainability cannot simply mean reducing expenditure.”
“They are also not keeping any sort of a list of possible eligibility for Thriving Kids (it wouldn't be hard for NDIS to do this or to ask providers to do this, to create a data base for those previously requesting assistance to receive a personalised contact from NDIS when Thriving Kids is due to be launched with instructions to help them access) and have in fact been told they will find out about Thriving Kids along with the rest of us, when it is in the Media. That is so disrespectful to everyone, the families, the provider workers, everyone! It shows the organisations contempt for helping families with kids who are struggling to develop skills.”
“I genuinely support reform that improves outcomes for children. But reforms must be built on developmental science, workforce reality, and practical implementation, not assumptions about where expertise currently sits … Children only get one early childhood. We cannot afford to get this wrong. Alison, who is another speech pathologist that lives in my electorate, has raised her serious concerns. She says: Children who would have got NDIS last year are now getting knocked back by NDIS with no plans to direct them into the Thriving Kids program, which as we know they are still trying to plan. I talked to one provider coordinator who said they haven't been given any different criteria for their submissions on behalf of applicants to the NDIS but they are seeing more children refused.”
“I am particularly concerned by the apparent intent to preference NGO and community providers while limiting access to experienced private providers except in exceptional circumstances. Many highly experienced paediatric clinicians now work in private practice. Excluding this workforce does not strengthen the system. It weakens it. The longer-term implications concern me greatly. We know unmet developmental and communication needs do not simply disappear. They often emerge later as school disengagement, behavioural distress, mental health challenges, family burnout, and greater reliance on more intensive and expensive systems of support. This risks becoming a cost shift rather than true reform, moving pressure from the NDIS onto families, schools, health systems and communities.”
“What developmental expertise will referrers hold? What happens when progress is slower than expected? Child development is not linear. Rigid, short-term block models may work for some children, but they will not meet the needs of all. There is also the very real issue of workforce capacity. Australian Early Development Census data show increasing developmental vulnerability among children entering school, including communication-related domains. At the same time, speech pathology access was already stretched before COVID, particularly in regional areas. The likely outcome is predictable: increased demand, reduced provider access and families waiting longer for support.”
“Nikki and Laura constituents working as speech pathologists in Maitland shared with me their concerns about the reforms. They say: One of the stated aims is to support children where they live, learn and play by building the capability of the adults around them. Yet the current model appears to exclude early childhood educators from accessing meaningful therapeutic education and support. This is deeply concerning. Early childhood educators are among the adults best placed to positively influence a child's development through daily interactions. If we are genuinely committed to building capacity where children learn and play, why are these key adults being excluded? I am also concerned about access pathways for children who require targeted therapeutic intervention. Who determines when a child needs therapy?”
“I also note concerns regarding the broad transitional rule making powers in the bill, including what has been described as a Henry VIII clause, allowing rules to effectively alter the operation of primary legislation. That is extraordinarily significant power, and parliament should always be cautious about handing over broad authority with limited scrutiny, particularly in legislation that affects vulnerable Australians. Within my own electorate, I've been contacted by constituents working within the sector who, though initially strongly supporting proposed reforms to the NDIS and the implementation of the Thriving Kids program, now after completing the expression of interest process and reviewing the draft program specifications have serious concerns that in practice the implementation of reforms do not align with the stated aims.”
“There is also concern about the proposed changes to the definition of permanence. The bill seeks to ensure that all appropriate treatment options have been explored before access to the NDIS is granted. Again, there is logic behind that principle. The NDIS was never intended to replace every part of the health system, but Australians with disabilities should not feel pressured into treatments they do not want and should not fear losing support because the bureaucrats determine they have not done enough to pursue improvement. These are deeply personal decisions, and they must be approached with compassion, common sense and respect for every individual autonomy.”
“Similarly, the changes to reassessments and eligibility tests raise understandable concerns. The bill proposes a far tighter framework for unscheduled plan reassessments, limiting them to situations involving significant and ongoing changes in circumstances. I understand why the government is doing this. There are around 12,000 unscheduled reassessments every month, and these have contributed significantly to plan inflation. But we must also remember that disability is not static. Life changes. Carers age, housing arrangements collapse, mental health deteriorates, children grow, medical conditions worsen unexpectedly and, in regional Australia, service availability can change overnight. We must ensure the system retains enough humanity and flexibility to respond when people genuinely need help.”
“We should acknowledge cases like these honestly and respectfully when considering reforms. These proposed changes are already causing significant anxiety for people with disability and their families because the government has not clearly defined how these powers will operate in practice. That uncertainty matters because people living with disability already live with enough uncertainty. Another area of concern is the proposal allowing the minister to reduce funding across groups of supports through legislative instruments. While the bill states the minister must consider participant safety, many Australians will worry about the precedent being created. People want assurance that the supports they rely on will not simply become a budget balancing exercise.”
“In my speech at the time, I shared these words from Marie, his mother: It is clear in Harry's medical documentation that his disabilities are life-limiting, but instead of spending time and making memories with our family, I must waste my time fighting this David and Goliath battle that consumes and controls my life. Harry passed away in January this year, an unthinkable loss for his family. Not only did the Melmeth family have to deal with the profound pain of losing a child, but they also had to experience the pain of a system that continued to let them and their boy down. The facts of this case are a shocking indictment of the NDIS, where pleas for help are met with silence or worse, silence from a minister having twice raised the concerns of the Melmeth family with no response whatsoever.”
“For a parent of a child with profound needs, it creates fear that supports will increasingly be driven by budget settings rather than individual circumstances. For people like the Melmeth family, they know this fear all too well. In October last year, I rose in this place to raise serious issues about the treatment of the Melmeth family, a family doing incredible work to give their severely disabled son Harry the best life possible, by the NDIA. Harry's story highlighted the systemic failings of the NDIS, showing how its processes can undermine the very people it is meant to serve.”
“It introduces new powers to reduce support funding. It changes the definition of 'permanence'. It creates mechanisms for automatic plan renewals, and it gives significant additional discretion to the minister and the NDIA. These are substantial reforms, and, for many Australians living with a disability, they are deeply confronting. One of the areas causing significant anxiety is the proposed change around 'reasonable and necessary supports'. The bill allows for maximum funding amounts, maximum support intensity and even maximum worker-to-participant ratios to be set through determinations. For government, that may sound like administrative efficiency, but for families it can sound like rationing.”
“The bill does introduce some fraud related measures, including tightening record retention obligations, shortening claim timeframes from two years to 90 days, expanding some information-gathering and regulatory powers and enabling greater automation and digital oversight of payments and claims. Those measures may help improve compliance and administrative integrity, but many participants, carers and providers are asking a fair question: where are the measures that actually go after the criminal networks, organised exploitation and deliberate abuse that have so badly damaged confidence in the scheme? This bill asks a great deal of participants and families. It tightens access requirements. It narrows assessment eligibility. It strengthens the connection between impairment and support needs.”
“Good providers are being undercut by dishonest operators, and genuine participants are increasingly worried that the actions of a minority are threatening the long-term sustainability of the scheme itself. That is why there is broad support for measures that genuinely target fraud, abuse and exploitation within the NDIS. The disability community understands that, if public confidence in the scheme collapses, the people who will suffer most are those who genuinely rely on it. The concern many people have with this bill is that, while it contains significant structural and access changes, it appears to do comparatively little to directly address the organised fraud and rorting that Australians have repeatedly been told is occurring inside the scheme.”
“I can't imagine what life would be like now for people with disability without the NDIS. It remains one of the most significant social reforms in our nation's history. It changed the way Australians with disability are seen and supported. It recognised that people with disability deserve opportunity, inclusion and respect. But we also know that confidence in the scheme has been undermined by serious concerns about waste, exploitation, fraud and unsustainable growth. Australians rightly expect that taxpayer money—their money—intended for vulnerable people is used properly. Participants themselves are often the first to say that the current system is not working as it should. Families are frustrated by inconsistent decisions. Participants are overwhelmed by bureaucracy.”
“I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, and I do so acknowledging something that every member in this place should understand very clearly: behind every clause in this bill is a person—a child with profound autism whose parents are exhausted and frightened about the future, a young person with an acquired brain injury trying to rebuild their life, a mother caring for an adult son with disability and wondering what will happen when she is no longer there, a regional family already stretched by the cost of living and trying to navigate a system that too often feels confusing, adversarial and impersonal. For many Australians, the NDIS is not an abstract policy debate; it is the way to help people with disability live their life.”
“The cottage was filled with big hearts enjoying a beautiful high tea served on Elaine's own personal tea sets. Through raffles, a dutch auction and generous donations, including my own purchase of this quilted jacket, the event raised more than $10,000 for the Ronald McDonald retreat. Thank you to Lance Fletcher for doing a wonderful job as MC and to the dedicated volunteers who made everyone feel so welcome. The Taree Craft Cottage is known for showcasing the talents of local craftspeople, but on that Saturday it showcased something even more special: the generosity, kindness and community spirit of the people of the Manning.”
“King Creek Road, just near where I live, is another example, with design sitting idle since 2024 while communities wait for progress. Ministers, cut the red tape, cut the delays and get on with the job. The Ronald McDonald retreat in Forster is an incredible home away from home for families with sick children, a place of comfort, hope and compassion during some of life's hardest moments. That same compassion was on display recently at a fundraiser for the retreat held by the Taree Craft Cottage. Under the extraordinary stewardship of Elaine Arneil, the cottage has raised more than $150,000 for local charities over four years, with this high tea marking her final fundraising event. I thank Elaine most sincerely for her remarkable contribution to our community.”
“The response I eventually received was deeply disappointing. I was told that Transport for NSW was 'preparing project proposals to release funds to begin work on a business case'. Regional communities are sick of endless process, paperwork and delay. They want action. How many more proposals do we need? How many more reviews? How many more near-misses, serious accidents and tragedies, before governments finally move? I've sought a meeting with the New South Wales roads minister to discuss this intersection, and a number of other dangerous locations across our region, and I appreciate her willingness to meet. But we need less talk and more action. People are dying on regional roads while bureaucratic processes move at a snail's pace.”
“A serious accident occurred on Friday 15 May along the Pacific Highway at the Bucketts Way intersection in my electorate. Sadly, this crash is not the first at this intersection, and, unless something changes, it will not be the last. For years, both the Australian and New South Wales governments have known this intersection requires major work: a grade-separated interchange—the real safety solution. Funding for planning has sat on the books for years, repeatedly re-announced at election time, yet still no work has begun. I appreciate that planning and approvals take time. But this process has dragged on for far too long, while local families continue to risk their lives every single day on this road. Last year I wrote to both the federal infrastructure minister and the New South Wales roads minister, seeking an update.”
“Food, fuel, electricity, insurance, rents and mortgages will be higher than ever because he still hasn't got a handle on inflation. Congratulations, Treasurer! You've somehow managed to make life drastically harder for just about every single Australian and still not even touch the sides of the deficit, which is set to breach $1 trillion. Constituents in Lyne have made it clear, as has Australia: axe these toxic taxes, or risk breaking the back of this country for good.”
“Treasurer, you're running this great country into the ground. You're punishing hard work, penalising aspiration and attacking enterprise—attributes that have made this country great. The Treasurer is coming after small business; ambushing young people at the precipice of getting their foot on the homeownership ladder; raiding the income of hardworking, taxpaying Australians; and backstabbing seniors, through the reduction of the private health insurance rebate. And for what? What do you get to show for it? For most constituents in Lyne, you'll have to pay to see a GP. You still won't have an urgent care clinic. It will be just as difficult, if not more so, to access aged care. Telecommunications will be worse, with $21.4 million pulled from addressing regional mobile and internet blackspots.”
“If you care so much about 'trans rights', you can work out a way to get them without destroying the category of women in law, female spaces, sport, services, the entire reality of lesbianism, and punishing citizens for acknowledging reality. The fact that you haven't even tried makes it appear that destroying the rights of women is the goal. Any politician who will look an Australian in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told. If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem, you are either malicious or incompetent. The days of dismissing this issue are over. This is not a culture war. It's reality. With that, I commend the bill to the House.”
“Let this parliament do what it was elected to do—listen, scrutinise, debate and fix legislation that has become unclear, unbalanced and harmful to the lives of ordinary Australians. This will take more time, but it will provide a pathway to reconcile the law that is failing Australian men and women. If he won't listen to me, perhaps he will listen to Sall Grover who kindly provided some of her own words for me to share: In a free society, people can believe whatever they want. If you want to believe men can be women or you're a man who wants to call himself a woman, that is your business. What you cannot do in a free society is force anyone else to accept it. What is at stake here is the ability to lawfully acknowledge reality.”
“But the Prime Minister and his government can choose to take a different path. He can support this bill. He can support women. He can support fixing the legislation he voted for in 2013. The Prime Minister cannot run away from this in 2026. If the PM won't support my bill, then I am gracious enough to give him another option. He can support the establishment of a joint select committee into sex based rights by both houses of the parliament to examine the operation of the Sex Discrimination Act and review the provisions of this bill. Let women and girls, sporting organisations, schools, hospitals, service providers, legal experts, faith communities, the LGBTQIA+ communities, employers, families and politicians from across the country have their say.”
“What are normally articulate politicians now stumble with word salads to describe what a woman is. Our institutions are making decisions not because the law is clear but because they fear litigation and public backlash. That is not good lawmaking. A liberal democracy cannot function properly when ordinary people become afraid to speak plainly. Nor can it function when parliament refuses to confront difficult issues honestly. With this bill, we could fix the Sex Discrimination Act and return women's rights within weeks. That decision is in the hands of the Prime Minister. Like women under the Sex Discrimination Act, this bill is silenced at the end of my speech. As a private member's bill, it is not treated with the same respect as government legislation. That is not by law but by convention.”
“This bill is about grounding the law in the reality and safety of biology, making discrimination protections practically workable and legally clear. The current Sex Discrimination Act has imposed confusion and chaos on many Australians. Women are prosecuted for denying biological men lessons in breastfeeding. Girls are forced to play with and against biological boys despite the threats to their physical safety or forced to share changerooms and toilets, denying them their privacy. Women's prisons and domestic violence shelters must harbour the very perpetrators they fear. Our language is defeminised. We now must chest feed. We are a birth parent, a pregnant person or a lactating parent. We are now people who menstruate and cervix havers. We have a front hole instead of a vagina.”
“The Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sex-Based Rights) Bill 2026 restores commonsense legal language to the Sex Discrimination Act. It reinstates definitions of 'man' and 'woman' removed in 2013. It restores references to 'opposite sex' rather than 'different sex' and makes other definitional change to secure sex as binary. And critically, it inserts explicit protections for women-only spaces, services and activities, including those online. This bill provides the legal clarity that this parliament failed to provide 13 years ago. And importantly, it does so while retaining protections for transgender Australians against unfair discrimination where there is no conflict with a person's sex. That is important because there will inevitably be those who seek to falsely portray this bill as an attack on transgender Australians. It is not.”