Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025; Second Reading

Campbell argued that the bill strengthens the legal authority for TIS National, which supports 155 languages and serves millions of Australians. Campbell stated that the legislation removes ambiguity and reduces legislative risk without changing operations or adding expenses. Campbell emphasised that the bill supports the government's Multicultural Access and Equity Policy and ensures equitable outcomes for culturally diverse Australians.

Joyce argued that while translation services are necessary, the emphasis must be on English language proficiency to ensure social cohesion and prevent enclaves. Joyce raised concerns that the Public Service Act 1999 and Work Health and Safety Act 2011 do not explicitly require public servants to speak English. Joyce stated that the ability to communicate in English is essential for individuals to access protections and contribute effectively to society.

Lim supported the bill, citing personal experience as a migrant and the challenges of navigating systems with limited English. Lim argued that TIS National is crucial for safety and participation, particularly during crises like the pandemic. Lim stated that the legislation provides a clear statutory framework for services that have operated for over 75 years.

Cook argued that the bill ensures practical access to government services for multicultural communities, reinforcing social cohesion. Cook stated that the legislation addresses legal advice from the Australian Government Solicitor regarding the need for express authority. Cook highlighted government investments in multicultural programs and the importance of language support for fairness and equality.

Georganas supported the bill, sharing anecdotes about constituents who suffered due to language barriers in medical settings. Georganas argued that interpreting services are fundamental to dignity and the right to informed consent. Georganas stated that the legislation protects these vital services and ensures they remain accessible for all Australians.

Briskey argued that the bill affirms that linguistic background does not diminish belonging or contribution to society. Briskey stated that the legislation provides a clear statutory framework for TIS National, ensuring services are future-ready and resilient. Briskey emphasised that language support is essential for safety, participation, and fairness in a multicultural nation.

Stanley supported the bill, noting that her electorate has high linguistic diversity and relies heavily on TIS National. Stanley argued that the legislation addresses risks identified by the Australian Government Solicitor regarding services to the private sector. Stanley stated that the bill ensures clear and enduring statutory support for functions that are fundamental to safety and equality.

lead

Ng argued that TIS National is essential infrastructure for a multicultural society, enabling equal access to public institutions and private markets. Ng cited census data indicating that more than 5.5 million Australians use a language other than English at home and described the service's critical role in healthcare and legal proceedings. Ng emphasised that the bill provides necessary legislative authority following advice from the Australian Government Solicitor and considers findings from the robodebt royal commission. Ng also noted the government's commitment to bringing outsourced TIS jobs back into the public service to provide job security.

Jordan-Baird stated the bill strengthens TIS National by providing enduring statutory support without changing service delivery or funding. Jordan-Baird highlighted that the service operates 24 hours a day, connecting over 1.3 million people annually with interpreters in more than 150 languages. Jordan-Baird shared an anecdote about a young constituent acting as an interpreter for her mother, illustrating the burden placed on children when professional services are unavailable. Jordan-Baird linked language barriers to poorer health outcomes and emphasised the importance of the Adult Migrant English Program alongside TIS.

Fernando described TIS National as essential nation-building infrastructure, noting its origins in 1947 and the introduction of telephone interpreting in 1973. Fernando explained that the bill fixes the lack of explicit legislative authority by formally empowering the Department of Home Affairs secretary to deliver these services. Fernando highlighted the free document translation service for new visa holders and the critical role interpreters play for women escaping domestic violence. Fernando cited census data indicating that 3.4 per cent of Australians possess limited English proficiency and argued that language access is fundamental to economic participation and safety.