Tuesday, 19 March 2024
Business of the house
Program
Business of the house
Program
That, under standing order 94(2), the orders of the day, government business, relating to the following items be considered and completed by 5 pm on 21 March 2024:
Estate Agents, Residential Tenancies and Other Acts Amendment (Funding) Bill 2024
Support for Victorian families – motion
Big Housing Build – motion
Level crossing removals – motion
Education State – motion
Energy and Public Land Legislation Amendment (Enabling Offshore Wind Energy) Bill 2024
National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid) Bill 2024.
It is good to be back in the Parliament again with a very full government business program. I want to note that we started the day with an appropriate condolence for the Honourable Digby Crozier, a person who served the state with distinction as a Liberal member of Parliament in both the upper and lower house. We followed that with what was a very embarrassing move by the member for Brighton in failing to show the necessary respect to the family of a man who has recently lost his life –
James Newbury: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, firstly on relevance – imputations are also, as per standing order 118, unparliamentary – I am sure the Leader of the House would not want to be reflecting on members of both this side and her own side of the chamber who spoke to the matter today even before the condolence motion was moved.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Was offence taken, member for Brighton?
James Newbury: Yes.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The minister to withdraw.
Mary-Anne THOMAS: I withdraw. Our government sees this place as a place where we do the real business of government and we deliver for the people of Victoria. We do not use it as an opportunity for political stunts. We have a significant legislative program and one that we wish to get on with.
I am pleased to be able to outline three of the bills that will be debated in this house this week. The Estate Agents, Residential Tenancies and Other Acts Amendment (Funding) Bill 2024 is all about our government’s commitment to securing safe and affordable housing for all Victorians. It goes to our government’s commitment, with the release of our housing statement and our 10-year plan, to grow the housing that is available for all Victorians at a range of different pricepoints but also with different models of ownership and tenancy, ensuring at all times that we are responsive to the needs of the Victorian community. This bill in particular works to assist renters and ensure that they have a dispute resolution procedure in place that will work for them.
The second and third bills are both related to our government’s transformative work in energy policy here in this state. I take the opportunity to applaud the Minister for Energy and Resources for being the most consequential energy minister our nation has ever seen for the way in which she has transformed the generation and indeed will transform the distribution and the retailing of electricity in this state to make sure that we have renewable energy, that we have affordable energy and that we have reliable energy. This is hard work. These two bills that are before the house will enable at least members on this side of this place to talk about that journey of transformation that our government has been on, because unlike those on the other side, we are not wasting time. We know that the transformation to renewables is absolutely necessary. It is absolutely necessary and essential that we get on with it. God knows where we would be if those on the other side were sitting on this side of the chamber. What an absolute mess we would be in.
We are very proud of the work that we are doing. The enabling offshore wind energy bill of course seeks to ensure that we can look to a future powered by wind energy – cheap, efficient and reliable. The VicGrid bill makes sure that we do have a fit-for-purpose grid to distribute that energy once it is generated. Again I might reflect on the comments of Digby Crozier, who talked about the importance of transmission lines throughout rural and regional Victoria to make sure that the power gets to where it needs to be. Indeed those will be conversations that we will be continuing to have with the Victorian community. Again, we have a number of motions in the house that we propose to adjourn off at the end of this sitting week as we prepare for the weeks ahead and the hard work that lies ahead of us.
James NEWBURY (Brighton) (15:35): I note before continuing that of the seven items on the government business program proposed for this week four are motions, and this is an issue that we have spoken about in this chamber a number of times. The government has listed four motions for this week for consideration. The concern the coalition has is the use of the Parliament’s time to deal with motions, however meritorious. The government provides no opportunity for non-government members in this place – the Liberal Party, the National Party or the Greens – to consider any matter that they put forward, so there are a number of very, very important issues on the notice paper that have not been included in the government business program. Four items – the majority of the government business program for this week – are motions that the government has moved. They are motions that the government has scheduled time for debate on, but none of the important motions in a very full notice paper have been afforded an opportunity to be debated in this place. It is for that reason and consistent with our previous decisions on government business programs that we will not be supporting the government in their business program this week.
If the government intends to use the Parliament to deal with motions, it is not unreasonable to provide the opposition or non-government members with an opportunity to consider other matters. It is not unreasonable for those to be considered. Of course, as has been pointed out, there are instances where condolences are dealt with, but in terms of motions more generally there are four motions on the government business program. It is the majority of the week’s work. There are four motions on the government business program. There has never been a non-government item on the government business program – never. Not one time has there ever been a non-government motion on the government business program. And in the overwhelming instances of these motions being dealt with over the last year in this place – we have had weeks – the majority of the week, two out of three days, was spent debating motions which made no meaningful change in law and impacted in no way in terms of finance or providing new funding for projects, programs –
A member interjected.
James NEWBURY: They, as my colleague has just said to me, in no way reduced the cost of living. Motions unfortunately are just that. They just speak to a matter and have no fuller effect in terms of creating change. So when we see a government business program that is overwhelmingly and by majority motions, rather than substance of bills or proposed laws, the coalition cannot support that.
There have been multiple instances throughout the last year where the coalition has moved very important motions and sought to adjourn debate for very important motions. Across the best part of 10 times, from memory, that the coalition has sought to have an opportunity in this house to adjourn debate after oftentimes a day of debate on a bill and allow an important matter to be dealt with, the government has opposed every single time the right of the coalition or non-government members any time for debate, so the coalition absolutely will be opposing the government business program, opposing a program which in the majority includes more motions than bills.
As I said earlier, there are four motions on the program for this week, more than bills, but more broadly than this week it is very important to note that there are no opportunities for non-government members in this chamber to speak to general motions on policy matters, and that should be a concern. I think I speak for all non-government members when I say that is a concern. It is not something replicated in the other chamber or in other parliaments, and so for that reason the coalition will be opposing the government business program that has been put forward by the Leader of the House this week.
Pauline RICHARDS (Cranbourne) (15:40): I am very much looking forward to debating the government business program and of course supporting the extensive and deep policy work that has gone into the legislation that we will be debating, which affects the people that we all serve, because I do not think there is a person in this chamber that does not have a renter and a group of people who want to make sure that the Estate Agents Act 1980, the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 and other acts are amended in a way that ensures fairness and equity as they live their lives, raise families and live in our communities. The idea that those opposite do not have the opportunity to debate or put forward motions seems fanciful, and I am very much looking forward to those opposite adding their voices and making contributions on not just important legislation but legislation which has extraordinary detail and is very much forward looking.
The Energy and Public Land Legislation Amendment (Enabling Offshore Wind Energy) Bill 2024 is fundamental to the future energy security of our state. I spend a lot of time talking to teenagers and the young people in my community as well as in my own family, and they certainly see the future in renewables. I do not know if my offspring will be watching the debate on offshore wind energy, but I can be certain that they are imploring our government and in fact our Parliament to make sure that there is action on a renewable energy future that does include sustainability to be able to continue to use the natural resources that we have.
The National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid) Bill 2024 of course gives me the opportunity to thank those linespeople who have worked incredibly hard. I am conscious that there are some parts of Victoria where our linespeople have to work particularly hard during natural disasters and bushfires. The Electrical Trades Union are always doing the work that they need to do to make sure that the members they represent and serve are safe, and this legislation is fundamental to those important elements of looking to the future and what is needed.
We do have still on the notice paper the take-note motion of the parliamentary apology to Victorians who experienced historical abuse and neglect as children in institutional care. I have the opportunity now to commend the way that people have looked at this motion, including colleagues like the member for Geelong, and ensured that the voices of the community that the members serve are recorded in this place. This idea from those opposite that motions are somehow unworthy of consideration in this chamber actually leaves me a little bit discombobulated, to be frank – absolutely discombobulated – because we just debated a motion that was brought forward under an extraordinary circumstance. Some of the previous motions that have been debated in this place include support for Victorian families that have considered IVF, and I call out the extraordinary contribution from the Minister for Public and Active Transport and the amazing contributions we have had on level crossing removals and the Education State. I am very aware that those on this side recognise that there are opportunities in motions to be able to record the important work that goes on in our state, where we are representing our community.
This is a terrific program of government business. We are united on this side of the chamber in looking to the future of what needs to be done and the work that needs to be done to make sure that our community has the energy resources and has the fairness that allow people to raise their families and to look to each other and know that the Victorian government is on their side. I am looking forward to other members of the Parliament also – (Time expired)
Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (15:45): I am pleased to also say a few words on the government business program. I acknowledge the work of the member for Cranbourne in getting the word ‘discombobulated’ in there twice. I am sure she is likely to win something. She has obviously had a bet with someone to use that. We are all going to have to go and look it up, because I am pretty sure she did not actually use it in the right context. But I also noticed that the member for Cranbourne was wanting to look to the future when it comes to energy policy. We all know in Victoria why the Labor government wants to look to the future – because the last 10 years have not been very good. If you are paying electricity bills in this state, you have only seen them go up. You have only seen reliability reduce. So I can understand that.
I note that the member for Cranbourne wants to talk about offshore wind and what a wonderful thing it is – that her children think it is great and everything – but the issue is: it is not going to affect in any way, shape or form the electorate of Cranbourne or indeed most of the electorates of members of the government. It will be the electorate of Gippsland South and the electorate of South-West Coast that will be subject to this. We look forward to debating that legislation, because, yes, there are potential benefits in offshore wind if it actually ever gets off the ground.
I note that the member also talked about deep policy work. I suspect when it comes to the offshore wind sector they did not do too much deep policy work after their mate in Canberra said, ‘Actually, where you want to create a port at the Port of Hastings, no, you’re not going to be able to do that,’ setting back the industry potentially years. I look forward to hearing members debating that issue in the legislation and explaining exactly where this is going to be built. I would invite all members opposite when they come to contributing on the Energy and Public Land Legislation Amendment (Enabling Offshore Wind Energy) Bill 2024 to give a guarantee to the house that the offshore wind sector in Victoria will in fact be built from Victoria, because at the moment we do not have a port to build it from. The government’s whole and sole plan was Hastings, and that has gone out the window thanks to Tanya Plibersek. It would be, I am sure, very embarrassing for those opposite were the offshore wind sector for Victoria to go ahead and be built in Bell Bay in Tasmania. I am not sure the government would be very happy about that.
I also pick up the point about deep policy work. I do not dispute that there may well have been deep policy work on that side on things like the Big Housing Build, which is a motion that is to be debated. The issue is that deep policy work does not necessarily mean you get it right. We have seen that not only with respect to rental affordability but to housing affordability and to rental and housing availability in this state, because that is going backwards at a rate of knots. I call out the member for Polwarth for some of the great work he has been doing in highlighting the failures of that. But in my electorate of Gippsland South since 2015 there are three less public and social houses in the Wellington shire and one less in the South Gippsland shire. So much for building up and increasing the social and public housing stock in our state! We have had a $5 billion spend, and in my electorate not a single new house; in fact we have gone backwards. I think the member for Polwarth has also highlighted that across the region.
I want to just get out a bit of my grumpiness. Not to give the government any ideas, but I note that both the offshore wind bill and the National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid) Bill 2024 are very similar. Last week we had a couple of bills that were also very similar, and I am surprised to some degree that the government has not decided to debate these bills in cognate this week. Last week most of us on this side and indeed most of the members of the government did not actually get the opportunity to debate the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 because the government decided they would whack it together and ram it through. As I said at the time, the government was so embarrassed about its SEC policy it decided to debate it in 2½ hours.
Members interjecting.
Danny O’BRIEN: Well, if the members opposite were not embarrassed, why did they ram it through in 2 hours? Obviously they were concerned, and I suspect they might still be concerned in the other place as to whether they have actually got the numbers over there. No doubt they will do another deal with the Greens and something else will come through.
I am surprised also that we are pushing through the Education State motion when you look at what is on the front page of the Herald Sun today. Again, I commend the good work of the member for Kew as the Shadow Minister for Early Childhood and Education for highlighting the failures of the Victorian Institute of Teaching in that respect. I would hope that maybe some members opposite, when they are debating that motion this week, might explain themselves in that respect. For those reasons, as the member for Brighton has indicated, we will not be supporting the government business program.
Iwan WALTERS (Greenvale) (15:50): I do not know about discombobulating, but that was certainly a dyspeptic effort from the member for Gippsland South, who himself admitted to being rather grumpy in his delivery. This is a really important government business program that we have before the Parliament this week. It is full of substantive legislation that will make a real difference to Victorians’ lives. Nothing could be more important to the work we do as a state government and as a state Parliament than impacting the cost of living for Victorians, and housing and energy are crucial to that. The Estate Agents, Residential Tenancies and Other Acts Amendment (Funding) Bill 2024 recognises, I think, that we are in an environment now where we have a record number of renters in Victoria. The changing nature of tenure in housing means that there is an obligation on government to ensure that renters have secure, dignified and safe housing, and that has been central to this government’s legislative agenda now over 10 years, as the member for Gippsland South generously pointed out. Over those 10 years we have brought through landmark reforms to improve the condition of renters and renting in Victoria. As a renter myself I am grateful for the way in which the security of tenure and the rights that renters have have been strengthened very significantly as a consequence of previous legislation.
This legislation will I think make another significant difference to renters by ensuring access to fair, safe and secure housing for all Victorians. It builds on the housing statement, which was obviously launched by the Premier and other ministers last year, and outlines a 10-year program of work to expand the supply of housing in Victoria. It is pieces of legislation like this that will strengthen the regulatory and legislative framework around that supply of housing and the conditions that renters are able to enjoy in Victoria. It is something I know we are all proud of on this side of the house. It is disappointing to hear that the opposition will be voting against the government business program, but I look forward to hearing their contributions on that piece of legislation when it comes on for debate later in the week.
The other big dimension of the government business program this week relates to energy. The National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid) Bill 2024 and the Energy and Public Land Legislation Amendment (Enabling Offshore Wind Energy) Bill 2024 are really substantive pieces of legislation that reflect a very significant amount of work undertaken by the Minister for Energy and Resources and her team in bringing them to this place. They reflect the fact that an immense energy transition is currently underway in Victoria.
I was reminded during the condolence motion that we participated in earlier, through a reference to Digby Crozier having been the minister for state development with a focus on sharing economic opportunity across Victoria, of the wind farms and solar farms we have in place in the Henty region and in Bald Hills and Waubra and in places like Winton. They are in a sense the modern iteration of that dispersed economic activity – places around Victoria which are generating the renewable energy that is such an important part of the energy mix already. 38.6 per cent of Victoria’s energy is generated from renewable sources already, with much more to come.
Renewables are not a coming phenomenon; they are here and they are growing. But Victoria needs a legislative framework around that creation and distribution of renewable energy that ensures that it is fit for purpose into the future. The National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid) Bill will enable the grid and the distribution network to be fit for purpose into the future, recognising that Victoria is bound into a national distribution system with the Marinus Link to Tasmania and its vast hydro-electric renewable resources likely to play a very significant role in Victoria in the future, enabling that distribution network to operate as effectively and efficiently as possible.
Of course the enabling offshore wind energy bill makes sure that there is great capacity for offshore generation. We are, as those who have ever visited Victoria’s wonderful coast would know, a rather windy state. But it is one thing having the capacity to generate renewable energy in offshore regions; we have to make sure that it is able to get onshore and to the areas of Victoria where it is needed most.
This is an important and substantive government business program. There are motions on the program, including, as the member for Cranbourne said, the take-note motion following the Premier’s apology to care leavers, and I look forward to the contributions that members will make. There have been some extremely moving and considered contributions already. I think it is a really worthy program, and I commend it to the house.
Roma BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (15:55): I rise to support my colleagues and oppose the government business program today. I do so because there are seven items on the government business program and four of them are motions. They are motions that will result in no change in the law and result in no decrease in the cost of living for families. Whilst we are here in the Parliament and Victorians are struggling to find a house, to pay their power bills and to manage the increased cost of living, it seems a waste of time that we are focusing on four motions that will not actually change the way Victorians are managing their activities, their daily living and their bills.
When I look at the four motions and see one on support for Victorian families, I expect to see in the May budget that there will be an increase in funding for the Warrnambool Base Hospital, because that hospital needs to be built to scope. It does not need to have services cut or have less or the same amount of theatres or less space in accident and emergency rather than the more that we were promised and which it needs. So we want to see an increase in funding. I would like to see that in the budget, and I expect to do so.
Another thing: if we are really talking about supporting Victorian families, we should also be looking at funding in the budget for the Lookout, the very important drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre that the Warrnambool region has been desperately asking the government to consider, because we are the only place without one in the state and we absolutely need this service of paramount importance for our community.
I also see on the government business program that one of the motions is to boast about the level crossing removals that the government has been investing in in Melbourne. One of those level crossings alone would have funded the Murray Basin rail program and seen more freight off roads and onto rail. Yet under this government, whilst they boast about being committed to rail, we see freight has gone from 14 per cent on rail down to just over 5 per cent on rail. The pressure that is putting on our roads is causing and adding to the crumbling of our regional roads. What we need to see in the budget, rather than sitting here and debating motions, is commitment to the rail project and commitment to the roads of south-west Victoria, which are crumbling and need a massive injection from the budget in May for their repair.
I also see on the government business program the government wants to discuss the Education State. I heard just in the Parliament this morning the Minister for Education say that the safety of our children is a priority. Well, the reality, from what teachers are telling me, is they are unable to keep children safe and children are unable to get safely between one safe space and the next safe space within the campuses of their schools. The amount of bullying and assaults that are taking place and the need to have intervention orders in our schools are putting teachers under enormous pressure. They tell me they do not have the tools to be able to keep order in the classroom and they do not feel backed in by the government to do their role. When I had the Shadow Minister for Early Childhood and Education in the region, she heard the plight of the teachers begging for support from the government. What they told us was there is not a teacher shortage, there is a teacher exodus.
This government business program is really bereft of the details that the community need to drop the cost of living and address the issues that are really making people struggle and unable to meet their weekly bills for groceries, power, the fuel that has got to go in their car, nappies and formula and things that young families need. I heard the Leader of the House say that the Estate Agents, Residential Tenancies and Other Acts Amendment (Funding) Bill 2024 will actually go towards securing affordable housing for all Victorians. Well, tell that to Doug, Nova and Archie, who are now in temporary housing through the charitable goodness of a local family, who have no security of tenure of their home and who are homeless, with a little girl in a wheelchair. Tell that to Doug, who cannot even find out where he is on the waiting list for a home. He has been waiting for four years and was told by the department – I was told locally he has been told – that there is no house for him and his son and daughter, who is in a wheelchair, but that he can go onto the rental market and try to rent one. The average rents are about $500, with very little support to be got from rent assistance. So this government business program leaves a lot to be desired in terms of being able to meet the needs of our community.
Assembly divided on motion:
Ayes (53): Juliana Addison, Jacinta Allan, Colin Brooks, Josh Bull, Anthony Carbines, Ben Carroll, Darren Cheeseman, Anthony Cianflone, Sarah Connolly, Chris Couzens, Jordan Crugnale, Lily D’Ambrosio, Daniela De Martino, Steve Dimopoulos, Paul Edbrooke, Eden Foster, Matt Fregon, Ella George, Luba Grigorovitch, Bronwyn Halfpenny, Katie Hall, Paul Hamer, Mathew Hilakari, Melissa Horne, Natalie Hutchins, Lauren Kathage, Sonya Kilkenny, Nathan Lambert, Gary Maas, Alison Marchant, Kathleen Matthews-Ward, Steve McGhie, Paul Mercurio, John Mullahy, Tim Pallas, Danny Pearson, Pauline Richards, Tim Richardson, Michaela Settle, Ros Spence, Nick Staikos, Natalie Suleyman, Meng Heang Tak, Jackson Taylor, Nina Taylor, Kat Theophanous, Mary-Anne Thomas, Emma Vulin, Iwan Walters, Vicki Ward, Dylan Wight, Gabrielle Williams, Belinda Wilson
Noes (27): Brad Battin, Jade Benham, Roma Britnell, Tim Bull, Martin Cameron, Annabelle Cleeland, Chris Crewther, Wayne Farnham, Sam Groth, Matthew Guy, David Hodgett, Emma Kealy, Tim McCurdy, Cindy McLeish, James Newbury, Danny O’Brien, Michael O’Brien, Kim O’Keeffe, John Pesutto, Richard Riordan, Brad Rowswell, David Southwick, Bridget Vallence, Peter Walsh, Kim Wells, Nicole Werner, Jess Wilson
Motion agreed to.