Debate resumed from 11 November 2025.

The Hon. DAMIEN TUDEHOPE (14:10): On behalf of the Opposition, I indicate our support for the overdue Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. The bill will add 10 new cancers to schedule 4 to the Workers Compensation Act 1987, creating a presumption that—provided a firefighter has met the qualifying service period—the cancer was caused by employment as a firefighter. I say the bill is overdue because, before the election, both Labor and the Coalition promised to give due consideration to expanding the list of cancers in schedule 4. I will not rehearse in detail the successive assurances given by the Minister for Work Health and Safety at budget estimates that work was being done. I do note our surprise at the absence of any documents evidencing such work ever being provided in response to an order for papers. I acknowledge members of the Fire Brigade Employees' Union [FBEU] who are in the public gallery today. They must be astonished at the lack of response by others to their campaign in respect of this bill.

In response to the absence of any evidence to back up the Minister's claim that work was being done and to honour the Liberal-Nationals Coalition's pre-election commitment to professional and volunteer firefighters to act on this matter, on 6 August 2025 the Opposition introduced the Workers Compensation Amendment (Firefighters' Diseases) Bill 2025. That bill passed the House on 18 September 2025, and it is still before the other place. The 10 new cancers in this bill include eight of the nine included in the bill already passed by this House and two additional cancers of the female reproductive system. This bill does not include mesothelioma. I accept the Government's assurance—which I understand is also accepted by the FBEU and the Rural Fires Service Association [RFSA]—that firefighters who contract mesothelioma are appropriately supported under the dust diseases scheme.

The bill also fails to mirror the provisions in the Opposition's bill that would reduce the qualifying service period for primary site oesophageal cancer to a more reasonable 15 years. That change was recommended by Dr Tim Driscoll in a 2020 review of the firefighter provisions of the Commonwealth's Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, which was adopted by the Commonwealth in 2022 and Queensland in 2024. The previous period of 25 years was considered anomalous with no scientific basis. The Opposition foreshadows an amendment to insert that provision into this bill. Before moving the amendment, we will listen attentively to the Minister in reply for an undertaking that further work will be done on progressing this proposal. If satisfied with the Minister's undertaking, we will not proceed with the amendment. We reserve the option of pursuing the amendment next year at a suitable opportunity if we judge that insufficient progress has been made.

The bill introduces an activity test for volunteer firefighters. We understand that there has been extensive consultation on this test with the RFSA and, subject to a small but important amendment to the definition of "frontline hazardous firefighting activities", agree it is acceptable. I note that both the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party and the Opposition have circulated an amendment to ensure cover for firefighters who previously made a claim for workers compensation for one of the new 10 cancers and were denied on the grounds that it was not contracted in the course of employment as a firefighter. It would be cruel to pass this bill, acknowledging the weight of evidence that the additional 10 cancers are likely to have been caused by employment as a firefighter, and then deny support to a firefighter with one of those cancers who was diagnosed prior to the passage of this bill. I understand that the Government will be accepting this fair amendment.

I commend everyone who has campaigned for this bill. The Government should have brought it to the House well and truly before today, instead of having to respond to a bill that passed this House with the support of The Greens some time ago—and I acknowledge Deputy Speaker Ms Abigail Boyd in the chair. It is because of the actions of the Opposition that the Government has been dragged to this place today to honour its commitment to our firefighters before the election. At any rate, we are pleased it has been done. I am delighted to commend the bill to the House.

The Hon. MARK BANASIAK (14:16): I contribute to debate on the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. Firstly, I acknowledge the presence of members of the Fire Brigade Employees' Union [FBEU] in the public gallery. I thank them for their advocacy in this space and for our many conversations over this bill and other matters. I thank them for their work. This bill adds safeguards to a job which, let us be honest, does untold damage. It leaves a mark. By the time the damage becomes visible, it is often too late for many of our firies. From the outset, the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party supports this bill. Obviously the devil is in the detail, and I foreshadow some small but sensible improvements that the FBEU came to us with. We will talk further to those amendments in the Committee stage. We think those changes strengthen the bill, without changing its intent. We encourage members from all sides to back those amendments.

Before we get to the details of the bill, I want to set the scene. A kid sits in the back of the family car and hears the distinctive wail of sirens approaching from afar. The kid looks up at the beautiful, bright red truck as it passes and whispers, "I want to be a firefighter when I grow up"—no-one in that situation whispered, "I wish I could be a politician," let us be honest. But we do not see what happens inside the gear. We do not see the smoke that finds its way into every layer and the chemicals simmering in that smoke—plastics, solvents, paints, foams, building materials and batteries. In this modern world, our modern fires are becoming more toxic. They burn hotter, and they release more carcinogens than they probably did 30 or 40 years ago. In that context, this bill is extremely important.

We do not see the weeks or months of hazard reduction that our volunteers do, breathing in smoke day after day. We do not see the 2.00 a.m. call-outs to structure fires where fumes are so dense that they can taste the chemicals in their mask. We certainly do not see those firefighters sitting in front of specialists, hearing those words that no-one wants to hear. Yes, it is about time that we pass this bill. I have spoken to many firies, and they can name half a dozen colleagues who have had cancers before the age of 50. I have met families who have lost someone far too young. The common denominator is exposure to the stuff that burns in modern fires. This bill, which adds to the list of presumptive cancers, is extremely important.

I now turn to the detail of the bill. The bill expands the list of cancers that are presumed to be caused by firefighting. That list matters to firefighters. It is the difference between spending months arguing with an insurer instead of focusing on treatment and recovery. Under this bill, cancers like pancreatic, ovarian, cervical, uterine, vulval, penile, lung, skin and other cancers will be added to the list of category 2 diseases with defined qualifying periods. These additions reflect modern research, fire conditions and exposure science. The bill also clarifies the disease categories. Category 1 applies to all eligible firefighters, including paid firefighters, volunteer firefighters and deemed workers. Category 2 applies to all paid firefighters and also applies to volunteers and deemed workers that meet certain frontline experience and training criteria.

I think it is reasonable that the bill establishes an advisory panel with particular expertise to ensure that volunteers are not left out in the cold because of the old mindset that says, "But you're just a volunteer." That mindset has plagued parts of the compensation system for years. The bill takes important steps towards recognising that volunteers face similar hazards to paid firefighters. They may even face more hazards on many occasions. Smoke does not check payslips before it fills your lungs. Both paid and volunteer firefighters should be protected. The bill addresses that issue by creating a presumption for volunteers if they have met certain requirements, including a frontline hazard firefighting test, required training and a set service period. That presumption is good, necessary and long overdue.

Members should not be playing political games or picking political fights over this bill. Parliament should pass the bill and enact it into law as soon as possible. Every member knows a volunteer that has been diagnosed or has lost a family member, a brigade that is still rebuilding after the devastating Black Summer bushfires or someone who has long-term health impacts from toxic exposure. Fire does not care about politics, and cancer does not check party membership. The least we can do is make sure that sick firefighters are not interrogated like they are trying to scam the system. I had planned to say a lot more about this bill, but I will leave my remarks there. This bill is not perfect—no bill is. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party will be moving some amendments that I hope will be supported by members. I commend the bill to the House.

The Hon. EMILY SUVAAL (14:22): I speak in support of the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. Firstly, I acknowledge the incredible work of the professional firefighters in New South Wales, particularly the firefighters sitting in the gallery today. I thank every single firefighter for their commitment to keeping our communities safe and for their day-to-day firefighting activities, including responding to emergencies, raising awareness of fire safety through education programs and promoting increased resilience for the people of New South Wales.

I also acknowledge the tireless advocacy of the Fire Brigade Employees Union, which is affectionately known by members of this place as the FBEU. I particularly acknowledge the work of the secretary of the FBEU. He was a tireless advocate when we were in opposition, and he still is now that we are in government. He walks the halls of this building to relentlessly advocate for his members. I look forward to Leighton's continued advocacy, and I know that he will continue to hold the Government to account.

This bill seeks to amend the Workers Compensation Act 1987 to expand the list of presumptive firefighter cancers. The legislative presumption provides simple and quick access to workers compensation for eligible firefighters diagnosed with any of the prescribed cancers. I acknowledge the work of the previous Government, which introduced the presumption in 2018. When an eligible firefighter is diagnosed with a specified cancer, the cancer is presumed to be work-related. The 2018 list consisted of 12 cancers, including leukaemia and non‑Hodgkin lymphoma as well as bladder, oesophageal and prostate cancer. The bill proposes to add 10 new primary site cancers to the list. This list of significant cancers includes lung, skin, thyroid and pancreatic cancers and six primary site female and male reproductive cancers, including cervical, ovarian, uterine, vaginal, vulval and penile cancers.

I hazard a guess that most members in this House know someone who has had one of those serious cancers. Cancer treatment takes a toll on individuals and their families. The carcinogens that firefighters are exposed to in their day-to-day work accumulate in the central organs of the body. It makes perfect sense to add lung, skin, thyroid and pancreatic cancers to the list, because they all affect central organs in the body. It also makes perfect sense to add significant female and male reproductive cancers to the list. We now know so much more about the hazards firefighters face during the course of their work. We have put modern measures in place to reduce exposure to hazards, but the risks still remain.

The bill will better align New South Wales other Australian jurisdictions. I note the Hon. Damien Tudehope's comments about malignant mesothelioma. The bill does not include malignant mesothelioma, because it is covered under the New South Wales dust diseases scheme. The bill proposes to add a further three female reproductive cancers in addition to the seven cancers it adds from the Commonwealth Government list. This provides greater equity for female firefighters in our State. I acknowledge those firefighters who are currently living with cancer or are undergoing treatment for cancer. I also acknowledge the firefighters we have lost to cancer they contracted as a result of their work. These cancers are, quite simply, brutal. Cancer treatments impact patients' everyday life as well as their future.

I also acknowledge the work and advocacy of a firefighter named Trevor Ross, who I have recently got to know quite well. He is also known to many members in this House. I spent a good deal of time exchanging stories with Trevor as we stood shoulder to shoulder at a pre-polling booth between periods of handing out how-to-vote cards. I learned a bit more about the many years that Trevor worked as a firefighter in Western Sydney. The things that he was exposed to in his daily work opened my eyes to the enormous tasks faced by firefighters, including cutting the walls off a house to extricate a deceased person or responding to other emergencies.

First responders have stories they take with them and never forget. I exchanged a few of my stories with Trevor, and he exchanged a few of his with me. Dr Amanda Cohn has spoken in this House about the one or two stories that first responders carry around forever. I shared my story of the arrest of a baby, which I will never forget. Trevor shared the story about responding to a fire at a Blacktown nursing home. That is something that I will never forget. I thank Trevor and the many other professional men and women of the State for the work that they do. This bill is a very important step towards acknowledging that work. This is a good bill. I commend Minister Dib, Minister Cotsis and their staff for pulling this important reform together. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms ABIGAIL BOYD (14:29): I speak in debate on the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025 as The Greens spokesperson for industrial relations and work health and safety. The Greens support this long‑overdue piece of legislation, which is also supported by the Fire Brigade Employees Union [FBEU] and welcomed by the Rural Fire Service Association. I acknowledge the relentless campaign by the FBEU for this commonsense and compassionate update to our laws. The bill recognises not only the obvious risks to firefighters' immediate safety when facing down fires and other disasters but also the long‑term health impacts that exposure can have.

The key reason we need these laws of presumption is that they recognise just how brutal and gruelling the workers compensation claims process can be. There is a need for a positive presumption because the way injured workers are treated by insurers and employers is otherwise a negative presumption. It should not have to be this way and, when we pass positive presumption laws like this, it is an acknowledgment of the broken and adversarial system we accept for other injured workers. I will not traverse all of the content I covered in my previous contribution to debate on the Opposition's bill, for which we were grateful. We are very eager for this legislation to pass swiftly, and we welcome the Government giving the bill a higher level of priority in today's schedule than it did earlier this week.

This House has already made very clear that this legislation is a priority, and it is good that this Government is also finally considering it a priority. Firefighters have waited long enough. I have no doubt my colleague Dr Amanda Cohn will give us the benefit of her experience both as a doctor and an emergency services volunteer to give more detail about what the bill means from a medical perspective and why it is so necessary. I will focus my contribution on where the bill diverges from the Opposition bill that was passed by this Chamber not long ago—that is, the additional requirements for volunteer firefighters to be eligible for the presumption for the new cancers. The Government has said that these additional requirements will target the presumption to volunteers who have a broadly comparable level of exposure to occupational hazards as professional firefighters, with these requirements subject to review by an advisory panel.

According to the statement of public interest attached to the bill, the additional requirements are proposed for volunteer firefighters in acknowledgment of the fact that the cost of liabilities for presumptive firefighter cancers are substantially borne by insurers and policyholders via the emergency services levy and local councils due to the statutory funding arrangements for the emergency services agencies. The Treasurer announced in November 2023 that the Government would overhaul the funding model for the emergency services levy, and a consultation paper released in April last year discussed replacing the insurance-based system with a broader levy across property owners. In this year's budget, the Government has raised its forecast for emergency services levy collections. The budget predicted revenue from insurer levy and council contributions is forecast to increase by $324.7 million over the four years to 2028-29 compared with the 2024-25 half-yearly review figures.

The Treasurer's hands are all over the bill. Once again, he has failed to do the hard work of reform, allowing costs to inflate. To constrain spending, he is restricting access to workers compensation for injured workers. Shame on him. This is a really important point because we hear the Government crowing and using all sorts of horrific lies and misinformation to try to justify pushing through its incredibly cruel workers compensation reforms. It goes on and on about the pressure on business. I could talk to members for hours about how there is no financial crisis in icare or how the reforms that the Government is pushing through will not lower pressure on premiums.

But let us talk about the other pressure on business that the Treasurer seems to have just forgotten about: the at‑times 24 per cent increase in business insurance. Business owners are paying thousands in insurance bills because of the inefficient emergency services levy that the Treasurer seems to have forgotten about in the scramble to get the workers compensation reforms over the line using all sorts of disgusting tips and tricks for pushing through bills that should never be considered. But I digress—only to  point out that in this case we are also apparently taking the really lazy "let's just cut through this thing and not give as much to these deserving firefighters" approach.

Let us come back to the core of workers compensation. Firefighters are being injured at work. The Government is saying, "Let us not make it any easier for them to get the help they need." Even though we are talking about relatively small amounts of money, the Treasurer is not going to reform the emergency services levy anytime soon. Instead, he is choosing to constrain and restrict access to workers compensation for injured workers. I ask the State to wake up and recognise that the Treasurer is just not very good at his job. The other thing about the bill is that it is not intended to be retrospective. That is cruel and unreasonable—particularly in the face of the Government's own delays on this important reform. I understand the Government may support amendments to make it retrospective in some regard, and we will support those amendments.

I also understand that there has been a decision to not include oesophageal cancers in the bill. That was going to cost around $4 million. Again, we are seeing an incredibly miserly approach to running the finances of the State. Sure, the Government can save a whole lot of money by cutting off the very people it was elected to support. That is a very easy way to balance the books. I call on the Government to finally start doing the hard work of reform—not cuts—and do the job properly. We are pleased that this particular bill has got through, even though it is not as good as what the Opposition proposed. I am sure that the union movement will be pleased that its voice has been heard—even if only partially—on one of these critical reforms.

The Hon. MARK BUTTIGIEG (14:36): I am proud to contribute to debate on the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. The bill is important because it is about a crucial issue for working people: the presumption of cancers as an occupational hazard. This is a landmark reform brought in by a Labor government doing Labor things. We have heard from members opposite wanting to take credit for proposing the legislation and serving as a catalyst. We have also heard backhanded criticism from The Greens about the Treasurer being miserly. But, at the end of the day, it is elected Labor governments that do these things. The idea that The Greens will ever be able to govern and do these things is fanciful. The idea that the Opposition would ever do this in government is also fanciful.

As we have heard, the bill expands the list of firefighter primary cancers covered by the presumption in workers compensation legislation whilst also being mindful of existing sustainability pressures on the workers compensation scheme. As is consistent with the approach of other jurisdictions, eligibility for volunteer firefighters will be subject to an activity test, prescribed training requirements and a review by an advisory panel in line with guidelines to be determined by the Minister responsible for icare. The bill goes further than other jurisdictions on female reproductive cancers by adding vaginal and vulval cancers. The Government had committed to exploring the expansion of presumptive firefighter cancers in New South Wales. The current Act we are amending lists 12 presumptive cancers for firefighters.

The bill will amend schedule 4 to the Workers Compensation Act, adding an additional 10 cancers. They are lung, pancreatic, thyroid, skin, cervical, ovarian, uterine, vaginal, vulval and penile. I understand the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party will move an amendment concerning the qualifying period for oesophageal cancer in the existing legislation. The Government has agreed to review this qualifying service period as part of the review of the arrangements after 24 months and will work with all stakeholders during the course of the review in good faith. The Government consulted with the key stakeholder, the Fire Brigade Employees Union, in developing the bill, and I acknowledge its representatives in the gallery. The union is relentless and fights for its members day and night. It shows that unionism is not just about wages and conditions; it is first and foremost about occupational work health and safety.

To those in the Chamber who decry Labor's relationship with the union movement, I say that the evidence is here and now in bills like this. I personally thank my good mate who is in the gallery, Leighton Drury, the secretary of the Fire Brigade Employees Union [FBEU]. He has done a magnificent job. I also welcome Johnno and the other FBEU officials to the gallery. I thank them and all of the dedicated staff at the union. I thank the FBEU for making sure its members' voices are heard in Parliament, because every worker deserves to be safe at work. Of course, I thank all of the grassroots members of that union, which has a very flat and accountable structure, as I am sure the secretary would attest. He lives and breathes it every day.

It is a little-known historical fact that firefighter cancer became part of policy in Australia after a 2011 Federal Government inquiry where the original list of 12 cancers that was adopted all over the country was written by the FBEU. The FBEU industrial officer who wrote the list was Claire Pullen, who is in the President's gallery today. Claire is the current group CEO of the Australian Writers' Guild and Australian Writer's Guild Authorship Collecting Society, and executive director of the Australian Writer's Guild. Claire has also been responsible for some landmark legislation regarding the use of artificial intelligence and copyright concerning those people in her union who were hitherto not being recognised for their creative talent and the contributions they make. I thank Claire, who is in a lot of ways responsible for this bill. I also thank Ministers Cotsis and Dib, both of whom are in the Chamber and who always attend when their bills are being passed. That is a credit to them. In conclusion, this is a Labor government doing very Labor things. It is a very proud moment to see this bill pass through the House. I commend all members of the House for supporting it.

Dr AMANDA COHN (14:41): As The Greens spokesperson for both health and emergency services, I commend the excellent comments that you, Madam Deputy President, made in speaking on the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. This change is overdue. Paid and volunteer firefighters have been calling for it for a long time. Like other members, I commend and thank the Fire Brigade Employees Union. This topic has come up in every meeting I have had with rank-and-file members or representatives of the union since I was elected 2½ years ago. It is clear that improved access to workers compensation, particularly presumptive cancer legislation, has been a real priority for the union. It is a testament to its work that we are debating this legislation today. I also acknowledge the Rural Fire Service Association, the Volunteer Firefighters Association and the Council of Australian Volunteer Fire Associations for their advocacy and support for this legislation.

Paid career firefighters and volunteers give their time and service to support and protect our communities. They work in the service of the communities that we represent, and they face very real risks to their health as a result. The very least we can do is care for them and support them when they come into harm's way in the line of duty. Presumptive cancer laws mean that workers diagnosed with specific types of cancer will be entitled to compensation on the presumption that the cancer was work related. That presumption is important because, for something that is chronic and multifactorial, like cancer, it is almost impossible in an individual case to prove that the workplace was the cause of that illness.

In my own work as a GP, I have been involved in a number of workers compensation claims for my patients. When something is simple, like an ankle sprain or a back injury as a result of manual handling, it is easy to sign the paperwork to say that the injury resulted from an incident in the workplace. Cancer is complicated. There are so many different factors that go into cancer, including genetics, diet, lifestyle, age and whether someone smokes. But there is obviously a link between the toxic chemicals that firefighters are exposed to and cancer. That has been proven even more conclusively by an excellent study in the International Journal of Epidemiology that covered a cohort of 470,000 American firefighters. That was from the American Cancer Society. There is clearly an increased risk for most cancers. That is compelling epidemiological evidence that the toxins in the workplace are contributing to cancer for firefighters, whether that is in the materials that are alight, whether it is exposure to things like asbestos in damaged urban environments, whether it is particulate PM2.5 pollution in the smoke and other toxins, or toxins in the firefighting equipment itself, like the foams that were used for many years and are now being phased out.

It is impossible to say that someone contracted cancer from one toxic fire however many years ago. But cumulative exposure is clearly a very real workplace hazard, and that is why we need presumptive laws. When people have had cumulative exposure over many years to those kinds of toxins, if they get cancer, it must be the presumption that the workplace contributed. People should not be dragged through an overly complicated legal system and multiple medical appointments that are not for their medical care but are for workers compensation paperwork. Facing insurers and government agencies is an awful thing to put someone through when they have just been diagnosed with cancer. If someone has been diagnosed with cancer, they want to spend their time accessing health care to benefit their health, and they want to spend time with their families. Dragging them through the extraordinarily complex process of trying to prove that their workplace was the cause of cancer to access workers compensation is, frankly, a cruel thing to put people through. That is why presumptive laws are so important.

I will speak briefly about oesophageal cancer specifically, because I know it was an issue of debate in the drafting of this bill. As a country GP, I diagnosed a case of oesophageal cancer in one of my very beloved regular patients and went on the journey with her from the moment of diagnosis through to her death. Oesophageal cancer is a horrible thing for anybody to live with or die from. It is not something I would wish upon my worst enemy. One of the most distressing symptoms of oesophageal cancer is the loss of the ability to eat and enjoy food, and people can die very quickly without invasive medical interventions like feeding tubes or intravenous nutrition. It is very disabling and can be fatal quickly. When setting up an important and overdue scheme like this one, we should not be splitting hairs over a relatively rare type of cancer. There are just over 400 cases of oesophageal cancer a year in New South Wales. That is not for firefighters or for worker's compensation claims; that is the total number of oesophageal cancer cases in New South Wales. It is such a small number that it really does feel miserly to split hairs over specifically excluding such a disabling and painful condition. That is not okay.

I will also talk briefly about the impact on volunteer firefighters, who I have had the absolute privilege of working alongside as an SES volunteer. I make it clear, for the record, that I have never held the hose. Whether doing supplies or answering radios, I have spent countless hours working as a volunteer side by side with RFS, Victorian Country Fire Authority and other volunteer firefighters. When they have given their service to communities and put themselves in harm's way at work—particularly unpaid—we must similarly support them to access the care and support that they need through the workers compensation system. Under this version of the bill, volunteers will be subject to an activity test before they can access workers compensation, and the detail of how that scheme and panel is going to work is critical. It is really important that volunteers, particularly when they have had extended service over many decades, are able to access this scheme appropriately.

Importantly, under the bill, a volunteer that passes the activity test can access the same amount of compensation payment as a paid firefighter. That is really important. I place on the record again the story of Bruce Barnes, a 40‑year service volunteer and longtime captain at the Lavington RFS Brigade in my community of Albury. He has cancer. He spends his time having to travel back and forth between Albury and Melbourne for multiple medical appointments. He had an approved workers compensation claim for his cancer being related to his volunteer firefighting. He was deemed to have 61 per cent whole person impairment, but was only entitled to a maximum of $220,000 in compensation, whereas a salaried firefighter in the same position would have received $485,000. I do not think anyone in this Chamber thinks that is okay. It is really important that volunteer firefighters can access similar compensation to staff where their claim is approved. In the coming years, as this scheme enters its implementation phase, I will be monitoring it closely to ensure that the activity test and the panel assessing volunteer service is adequately providing volunteers with extended service the compensation that they deserve when they have had extended exposure to toxins in their workplace.

Finally, I speak briefly to the issue of retrospectivity, because I know we are also going to be debating amendments in that respect. The Government is absolutely doing the right thing by introducing this legislation. I have spoken about presumptive laws and how important they are. It is quite astounding that the Government would introduce legislation to support both paid and volunteer firefighters to access the care and support they need for prospective cancer, but then exclude the ones who already have cancer. In this sitting period we have had substantial debate around the workers compensation system for psychosocial injuries. The Minns Labor Government has put forward the egregious proposal that people with existing claims for psychosocial injury in the workplace should be kicked out of the scheme and lose their access to support for their existing injuries.

This feels like a similar problem; we are going to support people who are diagnosed with cancer in the future, but not the people who are already living with a cancer diagnosis. That is not okay, and it is important that we seriously consider amendments around retrospectivity. In conclusion, this is really important, positive legislation. I am glad that today the Government is finally giving the bill the priority and the attention it deserves in this House. I support the bill.

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM (Special Minister of State, Minister for Transport, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Music and the Night-time Economy) (14:32): In reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions. This debate today will raise mixed emotions for families who have lost their firefighting family members to cancer. The truth is, it will remind them of that tragedy. For firefighters on the front line now, whether they are paid or whether are a volunteer, I hope the bill indicates to them that the Parliament recognises them and the dangerous work that they do every day to protect the wider community. I think those sentiments have been reflected in the contributions of all members. I thank the Leader of the Opposition for declaring the Opposition's support for this specific bill, the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Bill 2025. I recognise that he introduced his own bill a short time ago. I indicate that the Government will be giving the assurances he referred to in the bill. I will deal with those in more detail, including the transitional arrangements.

I thank the Hon. Mark Banasiak for his support of the bill and also for his flagged amendments. Both he and the Opposition have dealt with the question of amendments in a cooperative way, as have other members. I also want to thank him for the genuine way that he spoke about the fact that far too many firefighters under the age of 50 have cancer. That is why this bill is so important. The Hon. Emily Suvaal put the case for the bill well, including the point about the dust diseases scheme sitting alongside it in relation to one of the specified diseases. I spare a thought for the former Attorney General, the late Jeff Shaw, and the important work he did to make New South Wales a leading jurisdiction in dust diseases legislation. I acknowledge his contribution in that space.

I thank Ms Abigail Boyd for her contribution to the debate and support of the bill. I do not accept her comments in relation to the emergency services levy and the Treasurer's work in that area. It remains a priority for the Treasurer and the Government. I simply place that on the record. The Hon. Mark Buttigieg spelt out why this reform is so important to a Labor Government, and I thank him for putting that perspective . I thank Dr Amanda Cohn for providing a medical perspective to the debate and for bringing to the attention of the House the important study conducted in the United States of America involving 470,000 firefighters. She emphasised the importance of the proposed changes to real people who are grappling with medical issues related to their service as a firefighter. I thank her for her contribution.

I will now speak about the proposed amendments and how the Government will be dealing with them. The Government thanks the Hon. Mark Banasiak for his flagged amendment in relation to retrospective eligibility—the transitional provisions. The Government accepts the amendment; we will deal with it in the Committee stage. It provides access to the benefit of presumption to firefighters who have been diagnosed with or tragically died from one of the cancers listed in the bill, from 6 August 2025, or who have previously claimed workers compensation at any time before commencement of the provisions for one of the cancers listed in the bill and have had their claim denied on the grounds that their cancer was not contracted during their firefighting service or that their service was not a contributing factor to contracting cancer. The amendment provides an avenue for firefighters in those situations to bring forward a further claim and have the benefit of the presumption. The Government is happy to agree to the amendment and thanks the member for his constructive work on this matter.

In relation to oesophageal cancer, the Government acknowledges the concerns raised by honourable members regarding the qualifying service period. The Government has agreed to review the qualifying service period as part of the review of arrangements after 24 months. The Government will work with all stakeholders during the course of the review, in good faith. Again, I thank honourable members for their constructive engagement on this issue.

As I indicated when I introduced the bill, while Parliament can be rightly proud of it and the way the entire Chamber has worked together, this reform really belongs to the firefighters who keep our community safe. The bill is the product of an extensive and long‑running campaign. It belongs to the women and men in our fire services who have called for this reform. As many members have done in the course of the debate, I recognise the Fire Brigade Employees Union and its secretary, Leighton Drury, and the Rural Fire Service Association and its president, Scott Campbell. The Government also thanks Stewart Little, the general secretary of the Public Service Association.

I also acknowledge the many other stakeholders who have called for this reform, including the Australian Workers Union. I too acknowledge Claire Pullen and her work on the original Monash University study in 2011 that examined the link between firefighting and cancer and led to the first legislation on presumptive cancers. As members have observed, the bill will enact an important reform that will give New South Wales paid firefighters and volunteer firefighters the reassurance that they will be supported for a broader range of cancers. I thank Minister Dib and Minister Cotsis, their respective teams and agency staff, who have all worked carefully on the bill. I commend the bill to the House.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Ms Abigail Boyd): The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

In Committee

The CHAIR (The Hon. Rod Roberts): There being no objection, the Committee will deal with the bill as a whole. I have three sheets of amendments—Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party amendments Nos 1 and 2 on sheet c2025-300A, Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party amendments Nos 1 and 2 on sheet c2025-315A and Opposition amendments Nos 1 to 4 on sheet c2025-292B. I understand that the Opposition will not be moving its amendments.

The Hon. MARK BANASIAK (15:01): Given the Minister's comments in his second reading debate speech in reply, I indicate that the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party will not be moving amendment No. 1 on sheet c2025-300A. I move Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party amendment No. 2 on sheet c2025-300A:

No. 2Transitional provisions

Page 4, Schedule 1[7], lines 9–13. Omit all words on the lines. Insert instead—

Category 2 diseases

(1)An eligibility provision extends to a disease contracted by a firefighter in relation to which either of the following occurred before the insertion of the eligibility provision (an existing category 2 disease)—

(a)the disease was first diagnosed by a medical practitioner,

(b)the firefighter died as a result of the disease.

(2)However, an eligibility provision does not extend to a disease contracted before 6 August 2025 unless—

(a)a claim for compensation is made under the relevant compensation Act in relation to the disease before the insertion of the eligibility provision, and

(b)liability for the claim has been denied and the grounds on which liability has been denied include that the disease was not contracted in the course of the worker's employment or that the employment was not a contributing factor, or a substantial contributing factor, to contracting the disease.

(3)For the application of an eligibility provision to an existing category 2 disease, the date of injury in relation to the disease is taken to be the date on which the provision was inserted.

(4)A further claim for compensation may be made under the relevant compensation Act in relation to an existing category 2 disease to which an eligibility provision applies if, before the insertion of the eligibility provision—

(a)a claim for compensation was made under the relevant compensation Act, whether or not the claim has also been the subject of proceedings in the Commission or a court, and

(b)liability for the claim was denied on the ground that the disease was not contracted in the course of the worker's employment or that the employment was not a contributing factor, or a substantial contributing factor, to contracting the disease.

(5)However, a further claim for compensation may not be made as provided by subclause (4) if liability for the claim is denied on a ground other than a ground referred to in the subclause.

(6)In this clause—

amending Act means the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment (Firefighters) Act 2025.

eligibility provision means an item of the 1987 Act, Schedule 4 inserted by the amending Act, Schedule 1[6].

relevant compensation Act, in relation to a claim for compensation, means the 1987 Act or the Workers Compensation (Bush Fire, Emergency and Rescue Services) Act 1987 under which the claim is made.

I will not labour the point. This amendment deals with the important aspect of retrospectivity. It has already been articulated why that is needed, so I leave my remarks there. I commend the amendment to the Committee.

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM (Special Minister of State, Minister for Transport, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Music and the Night-time Economy) (15:01): I reiterate my earlier comments. The Government thanks the member for moving this amendment and also thanks other members for the way they have dealt with it. It is a really sensible landing—it is important. The Government supports this amendment.

The Hon. AILEEN MacDONALD (15:02): The Opposition supports the amendment.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Rod Roberts): The Hon. Mark Banasiak has moved Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party amendment No. 2 on sheet c2025-300A. The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

Amendment agreed to.

The Hon. MARK BANASIAK (15:02): By leave: I move Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party amendments Nos 1 and 2 on sheet c2025-315A in globo:

No. 1Meaning of "frontline hazardous firefighting activities"

Page 6, Schedule 2[3], proposed section 10B(8), line 19. Omit "directly".

No. 2Meaning of "frontline hazardous firefighting activities"

Page 6, Schedule 2[3], proposed section 10B(8), line 23. Omit "directly".

These amendments go to the heart of what it means to be a volunteer firefighter and what are considered frontline hazardous firefighting activities. It is not always the one holding the hose who might contract cancer. Sometimes it is the people doing hazard reduction burns, who experience the cumulative effect of exposure to hazardous materials. I think it is a sensible amendment that clarifies that it is not always the person at the front end holding the hose who might suffer from these cancers. With those remarks, I commend the amendment to the Committee.

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM (Special Minister of State, Minister for Transport, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Music and the Night-time Economy) (15:03): The bill is structured in the way it is because the additional requirement for volunteers recognises that there are many different ways to volunteer. Not all volunteer roles involve frontline firefighting. However, this is a good amendment. It is supported by the Government because it is viewed as a practical change that acknowledges that firefighting, as the member said, is not always a single, linear task. Volunteers might engage in a range of tasks while out on the front line. This amendment provides that flexibility in the bill.

The Hon. AILEEN MacDONALD (15:03): I also indicate that the Opposition supports the amendment.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Rod Roberts): The Hon. Mark Banasiak has moved Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party amendments Nos 1 and 2 on sheet c2025-315A. The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

The CHAIR (The Hon. Rod Roberts): The question now is that the bill as amended be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM: I move:

That the Chair do now leave the chair and report the bill to the House with amendments.

Motion agreed to.

Adoption of Report

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM: I move:

That the report be adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Third Reading

The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM: I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.