Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services) Share this | Hansard source

On the one hand in this debate we see that Labor is proposing a raft of measures to protect the vulnerable and to ensure that they benefit from a strong economy. On the other hand, I have to say, the previous government disappointed and failed to protect vulnerable Australians during their tenure in government. Appropriately, this debate has been about carers and pensioners. I would like to draw particular attention to people with disabilities, who are at the centre of potentially being the most vulnerable people in our community. If we look at the policies of the Rudd Labor government and contrast them with the scoreboard of the last 11 years, we can only draw the conclusion that if you are vulnerable in this society you are far better off having a Labor government in Canberra. When I try to assess what it means to be vulnerable, I think it is someone who lacks human rights and someone who lacks the opportunity of education and to enjoy wealth, home ownership and access to buildings, jobs and income.

I heard at question time very clearly—as we have heard over the last number of days—our Prime Minister saying that in this budget whatever will be done will be done fairly and that this government appreciates carers and seniors and the invaluable work they do for the community. In fact, we in the Labor Party have a century-long commitment to the fair go, and that certainly will not end on budget night. That is why, when carers and seniors compare their bonus payments this year with what they received last year, they will be no worse off. In addition, the government has increased the utilities allowance to $500 per year and for the first time ever it is extended to recipients of the carers payment.

We also know that carers and seniors need more financial certainty than they have been receiving in recent years. The bonuses, which the opposition is so loudly shouting about now, we found out about in budget speech after budget speech. They were one-off payments. There was never a guarantee under the old mob—no promise into the future, no commitment and, sadly, no plan. This is the system which we have inherited. This is the system we are working with. Mr Speaker, I can reliably assure you that things will get better.

The idea that Labor lacks compassion is simply laughable. As I have said in this place before, Labor has always been the party which cares about all Australians, which understands the need in our community for support and assistance. The Whitlam government was the first to commit to indexing pensions to cost-of-living increases. It delivered in its first six months the single mothers benefit, the first Commonwealth income support payment to single parents. In the late eighties and the early nineties the reformist Hawke and Keating governments introduced the family assistance package and child support payments, and replaced the unemployment benefit with the Newstart and Jobstart allowances, linking for the first time social security payments with an active non-punitive employment participation scheme. They introduced the sole parent pension, set at the same level as the age pension. They in fact replaced the invalid pension with the disability support pension. Let us not forget that in 1991 it was the superannuation guarantee charge which provided low-income Australian working families with the opportunity and prospect of some retirement income. This is why we go on with this debate: Labor has always been the party which has protected the most vulnerable in our community.

We hear the opposition say that they are now the models—that they are the Mother Theresas and St Bernards of compassion. Where was their compassion in 2003, when they planned to cut 30,000 families off the childcare allowance? What is it about Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, epilepsy and PKU that would require those disabilities to be taken off the list of recognised conditions for the childcare allowance? It was only through the efforts of Labor, carer groups and, no doubt, a few quiet voices of conscience in the now opposition that these savage cuts were reversed.

In looking at my own portfolio area of disabilities and children’s services, I look at the opposition, who had the chance for 11 years to demonstrate their commitment in the disabilities area. I take nothing away from individual members of the opposition, such as the member for McMillan, who has already approached me about issues in disability and government. But, apart from those individual contributions, the scoreboard for the past 11 years has reflected that the most vulnerable in this community, people living with severe and profound disabilities, were missing out. In fact, the number of people pushed onto the disability support pension grew from 500,000 to 720,000. Indeed, this was despite the Howard government’s much vaunted, although significantly punitive, Welfare to Work. All that happened was that people were pushed off the pension, and the endeavours to punish people created fear. It was about money saving. It was never about people with disabilities.

I have had a look at some of the numbers which the OECD have reported about disability in Australia at the coming to power of Labor. The numbers are not pretty and do not reflect well on the treatment of the most vulnerable in this community in the last 11 years. There was a fall in spending on sickness benefits by the previous government. The employment rate of people with disability has been falling. It is under 40 per cent, which puts us well down the bottom of the charts in the OECD.

See this speech in context