|
representatives vote 2023-05-24#6
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-08-11 10:22:02
|
Title
Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023 - Consideration in Detail - Migration & refugee settlement; people from culturally and linguistically diverse lived experience- Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023 - Consideration in Detail - Migration & refugee settlement; cultural & linguistic diversity
Description
-
- The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-05-24.38.1) introduced by Fowler MP [Dai Le](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fowler/dai_le) (Independent), which means they failed.
- ### What do these amendments do?
- Ms Le [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-05-24.38.1):
- > *Overall, my amendments seek to ensure that the government think about the plan for infrastructure in communities where there are large influxes of migrants and refugees, such as in electorates like Fowler. We have had over 10,000 refugees settle in our city in recent years with no infrastructure planning in place to deal with the growth of the community.*
- >
- > *Amendments (1) and (2) refer to the auditing responsibilities of Infrastructure Australia to ensure that the decisions they make will have particular regard to migrant and refugee settlement policies. I don't understand why communities like ours, who have had to shoulder the challenges of settling refugees and migrants, miss out on resources that would enable these newly arrived migrants or refugees to one day be able to stand on their own two feet and contribute back to this society. This amendment may be specific, but migrant and refugee policy ultimately affects Australians currently living here. We are about to bring in 1.5 million people, and therefore I would say that infrastructure is critical to sustaining the influx and the settlement of migrants.*
- >
- > *Amendment (7) refers to the particular clause in which Infrastructure Australia allows for affirmative action in relation to the appointment of women in their commission and advisory board. I really urge the government to also consider this point with relation to the appointment of people of culturally and linguistically diverse lived experience who have experience of infrastructure.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 3), after "growth", insert ", with particular regard for migration and refugee settlement policy".*
- >
- > *(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 4), after "social", insert ", cultural".*
- >
> *(7) Schedule 1, item 22, page 13 (line 4), after "women", insert ", and people of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,".*- > *(7) Schedule 1, item 22, page 13 (line 4), after "women", insert ", and people of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,".*
-
-
|
|
representatives vote 2023-05-24#6
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-08-11 10:21:32
|
Title
Bills — Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023; Consideration in Detail- Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023 - Consideration in Detail - Migration & refugee settlement; people from culturally and linguistically diverse lived experience
Description
<p class="speaker">Dai Le</p><p>by leave—I move amendments (1), (2) and (7) together as circulated in my name:</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-05-24.38.1) introduced by Fowler MP [Dai Le](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fowler/dai_le) (Independent), which means they failed.
- ### What do these amendments do?
- Ms Le [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-05-24.38.1):
- > *Overall, my amendments seek to ensure that the government think about the plan for infrastructure in communities where there are large influxes of migrants and refugees, such as in electorates like Fowler. We have had over 10,000 refugees settle in our city in recent years with no infrastructure planning in place to deal with the growth of the community.*
- >
- > *Amendments (1) and (2) refer to the auditing responsibilities of Infrastructure Australia to ensure that the decisions they make will have particular regard to migrant and refugee settlement policies. I don't understand why communities like ours, who have had to shoulder the challenges of settling refugees and migrants, miss out on resources that would enable these newly arrived migrants or refugees to one day be able to stand on their own two feet and contribute back to this society. This amendment may be specific, but migrant and refugee policy ultimately affects Australians currently living here. We are about to bring in 1.5 million people, and therefore I would say that infrastructure is critical to sustaining the influx and the settlement of migrants.*
- >
- > *Amendment (7) refers to the particular clause in which Infrastructure Australia allows for affirmative action in relation to the appointment of women in their commission and advisory board. I really urge the government to also consider this point with relation to the appointment of people of culturally and linguistically diverse lived experience who have experience of infrastructure.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 3), after "growth", insert ", with particular regard for migration and refugee settlement policy".*
- >
- > *(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 4), after "social", insert ", cultural".*
- >
- > *(7) Schedule 1, item 22, page 13 (line 4), after "women", insert ", and people of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,".*
<p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 3), after "growth", insert ", with particular regard for migration and refugee settlement policy".</p><p class="italic">(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 4), after "social", insert ", cultural".</p><p class="italic">(7) Schedule 1, item 22, page 13 (line 4), after "women", insert ", and people of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,".</p><p>Overall, my amendments seek to ensure that the government think about the plan for infrastructure in communities where there are large influxes of migrants and refugees, such as in electorates like Fowler. We have had over 10,000 refugees settle in our city in recent years with no infrastructure planning in place to deal with the growth of the community.</p><p>Amendments (1) and (2) refer to the auditing responsibilities of Infrastructure Australia to ensure that the decisions they make will have particular regard to migrant and refugee settlement policies. I don't understand why communities like ours, who have had to shoulder the challenges of settling refugees and migrants, miss out on resources that would enable these newly arrived migrants or refugees to one day be able to stand on their own two feet and contribute back to this society. This amendment may be specific, but migrant and refugee policy ultimately affects Australians currently living here. We are about to bring in 1.5 million people, and therefore I would say that infrastructure is critical to sustaining the influx and the settlement of migrants.</p><p>My electorate of Fowler has been a settlement city. More than 70 per cent of our population have parents born overseas or people speaking a language other than English. We are a settlement electorate, and we're proud of that. As a former refugee myself, I know that people like me have contributed so much to the rich cultural tapestry of Fowler, but our area is buckling from the pressure of having to accommodate more people with very little infrastructure support from successive governments. We are now facing a housing crisis and an unemployment rate of 10 per cent, three times the national average. With a second airport being built out in Western Sydney, major infrastructure such as rail projects must be designed so that we can connect major cities like Sydney, Parramatta, Liverpool and Fairfield to the Badgerys Creek airport.</p><p>Amendment (7) refers to the particular clause in which Infrastructure Australia allows for affirmative action in relation to the appointment of women in their commission and advisory board. I really urge the government to also consider this point with relation to the appointment of people of culturally and linguistically diverse lived experience who have experience of infrastructure. In my previous life in the corporate sector, I have seen so many boards that do not reflect the rich diversity of our modern Australia. I hope that this will welcome the diversity of lived experiences in assessing infrastructure fairly so that all communities will ultimately benefit. After all, it's the wealth of diverse knowledge that will ultimately benefit everyone, from the highest levels of government to the communities across Western Sydney and in the regions. I ask the government to really consider my amendments above and to take action to ensure we do what's best for our diverse migrant and refugee communities.</p> <p class="speaker">Catherine King</p><p>NE KING (—) (): Again, the government won't be supporting the amendments. I do appreciate the spirit in which they have been raised by the member for Fowler, particularly in relation to amendment (1), which is reflective of the problems we have around settlement policy and around our urban centres at the moment. The intention behind the amendment is absolutely understood and appreciated. Having regard to population movement, particularly in relation to migration patterns, is a very important consideration when determining the adequacy, capacity and condition of nationally significant infrastructure. The existing wording of the bill clearly states that Infrastructure Australia must take into account population growth, so we believe that that adequately covers the intent of the amendment.</p><p>In relation to amendment (2), again, the intention behind the amendments is understood and very much appreciated, but the existing weighting of the bill, we think, already covers the broad breadth of what you are seeking to achieve in terms of cultural diversity. In terms of amendment (7), as well, we are committed to increasing cultural diversity. The way the phrasing around affirmative action is at the moment is consistent with government policy about what we are trying to do around boards. But of course there is a broader piece of work that we are doing around multicultural policy and multicultural strategy overall, which is led by Minister Giles. I think when you see some of that work you will see much greater improvements in the way in which we include people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in a range of projects.</p> <p class="speaker">Kylea Tink</p><p>I rise in support of the amendment moved by the minister—the member for Fowler! One day hopefully minister! There's a really subtle but important point that is being lost within this debate. Earlier today we saw the opposition move an amendment to try and ensure there would be someone who had significant regional and rural experience appointed to work with this board. We now have a member who is standing and asking respectfully that there be a requirement that somebody from a culturally and linguistically diverse background also be considered for appointment to this board. I've heard the minister now respond that she's confident that the contents of the legislation are such that they will bring about this diversity.</p><p>What I would like to reflect back to the government of the day is that one of my understandings is that you are most proud of the fact that over 50 per cent of those who now sit in parliament for you are women. What I would like to point out to your party is that that, in large part, was brought about because of the quotas you set for yourselves and the commitment you made to ensure that that diversity was mandated in the way that your party structure moved forward. To go from that position to now adopting the opposite, which is: 'She'll be right. We don't need quotas or directions, because merit will get the right people there,' is to actually step away from what you have led so well on in the case of female representation. Respectfully, I would ask the minister to reconsider the amendment that is being offered by the member for Fowler. I think she is quite rightly arguing now for the next frontier of true representation for diverse communities when it comes to how legislation is developed.</p> <p class="speaker">Andrew Gee</p><p>I rise to support the amendments that have been put forward by the member for Fowler. I think they are very important amendments. I think they are worthy of support not only from the crossbench; I'd like to see the opposition in here supporting them. These amendments go to key issues affecting regional Australia, and giving regional, rural and remote Australia a stronger voice when these vital decisions and recommendations are made.</p><p>The reality is that there is still a great divide in this country between the cities and the bush, regional Australia. That divide exists in so many different ways. It's a divide of opportunity. It's a divide of services. It's a divide in health outcomes. It's a divide in education. It's also a divide in infrastructure. I really commend the member for Fowler for putting this amendment forward and making sure that Infrastructure Australia reflects the great diversity of our country, but also making sure that there is that rural and regional voice at the table. I think it's vitally important. I would encourage all members of this House to get behind these amendments and support the member for Fowler.</p> <p class="speaker">Sophie Scamps</p><p>S () (): I, too, would like to support the member for Fowler's amendments. We're having a big debate at the moment about voice and about people being heard. What we've had here this morning is asking for people's communities' voices to be heard. We've heard that for rural and regional Australia. We've heard it from the member for North Sydney, for communities to be heard. Now we're hearing it from the member for Fowler, for multicultural communities to be heard. This is essentially about our communities having a voice and having a say in these nationally important decisions. What is happening here is that we are asking for there to be greater transparency and greater inclusion of these different communities in our own society. I commend the bill to the House.</p> <p class="speaker">Milton Dick</p><p>The question is the amendments (1), (2) and (7) moved by the member for Fowler be disagreed to.</p><p></p><p></p> -
-
|