Division Description Changes — Bills — Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023; Second Reading — 14th Nov 2023

Change	Division
senate vote 2023-11-14#2 Edited by mackay staff on 2024-02-15 16:33:08	Title ~~Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 - Second Reading -~~ Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Fossil fuels Description The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-11-06.165.11) introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Nick McKim](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/nick_mckim) (Greens), which means it failed. This amendment text would have been added to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (to read a bill for a second time is to agree with its main idea). ### Amendment text > … but the Senate: > > (a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas; and > > (b) resolves that Australia must: > >> (i) not open up any new coal mines or gas fields; and >> >> (ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels". >> (ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels".
senate vote 2023-11-14#2 Edited by mackay staff on 2024-02-15 16:32:58	Title Bills — Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023; Second Reading Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Description ~~<p class="speaker">Jenny McAllister</p>~~ <p>As I noted last night, the opposition's position on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 is disappointing, but it's really not that surprising and it shows that they are still prepared to play politics with Australia's national interests. The opposition actually knows the challenges that we face in a more contested region. Senator Birmingham knows. Senator Paterson knows. They know that Australia must work harder than ever to stay competitive and to be a partner of choice for the Pacific and that deeper regional economic and social integration is central to delivering our interests in a peaceful, stable and prosperous region.</p> The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-11-06.165.11) introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Nick McKim](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/nick_mckim) (Greens), which means it failed. This amendment text would have been added to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (to read a bill for a second time is to agree with its main idea). ### Amendment text** > … but the Senate: > *> (a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the** region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas; and* > *> (b) resolves** that Australia must:* > *>> (i) not open up any new coal mines or gas fields;** and* >> *>> (ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the explo*ration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels". <p>Australia took a massive step forward last week when Prime Minister Albanese and Prime Minister Natano signed the Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union. It represents the most important development for Australia in the Pacific since the independence of Papua New Guinea in 1975, and it commits Australia to provide assistance to Tuvalu in the face of security threats while also establishing a dedicated migration pathway for Tuvaluans to work, study and live in Australia. It gives effect to the concept of Pacific-led security. The Falepili union was a request from Tuvalu for Australia to assist in dealing with the urgent impacts of climate change, its security challenges and the need to safeguard the future of its people, its islands and its culture, and Australia was honoured to respond.</p> <p>But, at the same time, the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for defence openly criticised Australia's attendance at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders summit. Two days later, they changed course and supported the Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union. So one day we had Mr Hyde and the next day we had Dr Jekyll. We welcome the opposition's support for the Falepili union, but it does raise the question: who will show up for today's vote? Will we get Mr Dutton's continued relentless attacks on the Pacific family, or will we get a party of government that supports our national interest in being a partner of choice for the Pacific family?</p> <p>I turn now to the contribution from Senator David Pocock and thank him for indicating he will support this bill and for working through his concerns and suggestions constructively with the government. Senator Pocock has made some important points about the difficulties that migrants face and about the importance of supporting successful settlement outcomes for Pacific engagement visa migrants. He has supported the bill's existing measures but then suggested that Pacific engagement visa holders should be provided with earlier access to four other benefits: JobSeeker, youth allowance, parenting payment and the low-income health card.</p> <p>The government agrees with Senator Pocock that we need to support positive settlement outcomes for Pacific migrants. That is why this bill and associated policy measures will provide a range of social benefits and supports to Pacific engagement visa holders, and this includes immediate access to family tax benefit part A, family tax benefit part B, the childcare subsidy, Medicare, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, public schooling, Commonwealth supported higher education places, the Higher Education Loan Program, VET student loans, youth allowance (student) and (apprentice), and Austudy. Pacific engagement visa holders will have access to four additional benefits Senator Pocock has raised—JobSeeker payment, youth allowance (jobseeker), parenting payment and the low-income healthcare card—after a four-year newly arrived residents waiting period. This waiting period for these benefits applies to most other categories of permanent migration to Australia, and the government believes it is providing a right mix of benefits and waiting periods to support migrants under the Pacific engagement visa program.</p> ~~<p>However, to make sure that the program is working as intended, we will monitor and evaluate the Pacific engagement visa as it is implemented and comes into effect.</p>~~ <p>Minister Conroy has indicated that as part of that monitoring and evaluation the government will assess whether we have got the mix of social benefits right. Senator Pocock has also made a very useful suggestion that as part of this monitoring and evaluation government should consult with parties with expertise in migrant settlement outcomes as it implements the Pacific engagement visa. I understand Minister Conroy has taken the suggestion on board and agreed to develop a consultation process. This consultation process will involve listening to people with expertise in the migrant settlement experience in a Pacific context, people like settlement service providers, social welfare agencies and, importantly, representatives of Pacific diaspora communities in Australia.</p> <p>Can I thank also Senator McKim for indicating that the Greens will support this bill. I acknowledge that the Greens have a progressive stance on migration, which is reflected in their support for this bill. I don't think I need to provide comment on the Greens's second reading amendment beyond saying that it draws a pretty long bow, and the government will not support it.</p> <p>Let me conclude this debate by explaining why the government is introducing the Pacific engagement visa and the PALM family accompaniment programs. Closer engagement between Australia and Pacific countries deepens our people-to-people connections, and it enriches our communities and our countries. As a member of the Pacific family, Australia is committed to working with all countries in the Pacific and Timor-Leste to achieve our shared aspirations and address our shared challenges. This bill is an important step towards delivering on our commitment to strengthen the Pacific family by supporting a flourishing Pacific diaspora in Australia and deepening connections with the countries of the Pacific and Timor-Leste, and these initiatives will strengthen our links with the Pacific family and deepen our ties to the region that is our home and that is critical to our future.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Glenn Sterle</p>~~ ~~<p>The question is that the Greens second reading amendment moved by Senator McKim be agreed to.</p>~~ ~~<p></p>~~

~~Jenny McAllister~~
As I noted last night, the opposition's position on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 is disappointing, but it's really not that surprising and it shows that they are still prepared to play politics with Australia's national interests. The opposition actually knows the challenges that we face in a more contested region. Senator Birmingham knows. Senator Paterson knows. They know that Australia must work harder than ever to stay competitive and to be a partner of choice for the Pacific and that deeper regional economic and social integration is central to delivering our interests in a peaceful, stable and prosperous region.
The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-11-06.165.11) introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Nick McKim](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/nick_mckim) (Greens), which means it failed. This amendment text would have been added to the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" (to read a bill for a second time is to agree with its main idea).
### Amendment text
> *… but the Senate:*
>
> *(a) notes the advocacy of Pacific leaders that the greatest threat to the wellbeing of the region is the threat of runaway global heating caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas; and*
>
> *(b) resolves that Australia must:*
>
>> *(i) not open up any new coal mines or gas fields; and*
>>
>> *(ii) remove the billions of dollars spent each year subsidising the exploration, extraction and burning of fossil fuels".*
Australia took a massive step forward last week when Prime Minister Albanese and Prime Minister Natano signed the Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union. It represents the most important development for Australia in the Pacific since the independence of Papua New Guinea in 1975, and it commits Australia to provide assistance to Tuvalu in the face of security threats while also establishing a dedicated migration pathway for Tuvaluans to work, study and live in Australia. It gives effect to the concept of Pacific-led security. The Falepili union was a request from Tuvalu for Australia to assist in dealing with the urgent impacts of climate change, its security challenges and the need to safeguard the future of its people, its islands and its culture, and Australia was honoured to respond.
But, at the same time, the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for defence openly criticised Australia's attendance at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders summit. Two days later, they changed course and supported the Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union. So one day we had Mr Hyde and the next day we had Dr Jekyll. We welcome the opposition's support for the Falepili union, but it does raise the question: who will show up for today's vote? Will we get Mr Dutton's continued relentless attacks on the Pacific family, or will we get a party of government that supports our national interest in being a partner of choice for the Pacific family?
I turn now to the contribution from Senator David Pocock and thank him for indicating he will support this bill and for working through his concerns and suggestions constructively with the government. Senator Pocock has made some important points about the difficulties that migrants face and about the importance of supporting successful settlement outcomes for Pacific engagement visa migrants. He has supported the bill's existing measures but then suggested that Pacific engagement visa holders should be provided with earlier access to four other benefits: JobSeeker, youth allowance, parenting payment and the low-income health card.
The government agrees with Senator Pocock that we need to support positive settlement outcomes for Pacific migrants. That is why this bill and associated policy measures will provide a range of social benefits and supports to Pacific engagement visa holders, and this includes immediate access to family tax benefit part A, family tax benefit part B, the childcare subsidy, Medicare, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, public schooling, Commonwealth supported higher education places, the Higher Education Loan Program, VET student loans, youth allowance (student) and (apprentice), and Austudy. Pacific engagement visa holders will have access to four additional benefits Senator Pocock has raised—JobSeeker payment, youth allowance (jobseeker), parenting payment and the low-income healthcare card—after a four-year newly arrived residents waiting period. This waiting period for these benefits applies to most other categories of permanent migration to Australia, and the government believes it is providing a right mix of benefits and waiting periods to support migrants under the Pacific engagement visa program.
~~However, to make sure that the program is working as intended, we will monitor and evaluate the Pacific engagement visa as it is implemented and comes into effect.~~
Minister Conroy has indicated that as part of that monitoring and evaluation the government will assess whether we have got the mix of social benefits right. Senator Pocock has also made a very useful suggestion that as part of this monitoring and evaluation government should consult with parties with expertise in migrant settlement outcomes as it implements the Pacific engagement visa. I understand Minister Conroy has taken the suggestion on board and agreed to develop a consultation process. This consultation process will involve listening to people with expertise in the migrant settlement experience in a Pacific context, people like settlement service providers, social welfare agencies and, importantly, representatives of Pacific diaspora communities in Australia.
Can I thank also Senator McKim for indicating that the Greens will support this bill. I acknowledge that the Greens have a progressive stance on migration, which is reflected in their support for this bill. I don't think I need to provide comment on the Greens's second reading amendment beyond saying that it draws a pretty long bow, and the government will not support it.
Let me conclude this debate by explaining why the government is introducing the Pacific engagement visa and the PALM family accompaniment programs. Closer engagement between Australia and Pacific countries deepens our people-to-people connections, and it enriches our communities and our countries. As a member of the Pacific family, Australia is committed to working with all countries in the Pacific and Timor-Leste to achieve our shared aspirations and address our shared challenges. This bill is an important step towards delivering on our commitment to strengthen the Pacific family by supporting a flourishing Pacific diaspora in Australia and deepening connections with the countries of the Pacific and Timor-Leste, and these initiatives will strengthen our links with the Pacific family and deepen our ties to the region that is our home and that is critical to our future.
~~Glenn Sterle~~
~~The question is that the Greens second reading amendment moved by Senator McKim be agreed to.~~
~~~~