Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

This is an issue that has been revolving in the parliament for many months now. I think a number of points have been scored by both sides in the politics of this issue, but it is becoming a very serious issue for a lot of people—parents and young people out there who are trying to make decisions about their futures. I would just like to make a plea on their behalf that, if there is a way in which both sides can make some adjustments to get this legislation through in one shape or another so that there is some certainty for those young people in the next month, we make every effort to do so.

This is a classic issue where it is very easy to develop political fear, and I have heard some of it today, particularly from the Leader of the National Party. He was essentially talking about the old legislation that has since been amended. That is all very nice from the perspective of scoring political points, but it frightens people in the electorates that we all represent here today. I would not suggest that the legislation which the Minister for Education has put before the parliament is perfect, but the Independents and others, I know, took some of their retrospectivity issues to the minister, and there have been adjustments. The minister talked through those adjustments concerning the gap students and the $150,000 figure—that is, that students living at home in families with incomes greater than $150,000 will miss out. I do not think anyone would complain about that arrangement for gap year students in those circumstances.

There are some very important points here. I know the government plays the income card and the opposition plays the independence test card, but I would implore both of them to look closely at what individual families will actually access under the new arrangements. There are still issues, Minister, in relation to those country kids who have no choice but to leave home. That is a valid issue that needs to be addressed, but some of the claims that are being made on the other side of the chamber—about young people not getting anything if they do not qualify under the youth allowance independence test—are nonsense. You need to look at the numbers, work through the family income with the individual, look at the circumstances of the student start-up scholarships and the Commonwealth scholarships and put the numbers together. There are numerous examples and, if I have time, I will work through some.

We have to make assumptions here, of course. We will assume two children living away from home—one in year 1 and the other a continuing student. Based on a family income of $60,000, the youth allowance for that family would be $25,316. Based on a family income of $80,000, the youth allowance, including the start-up scholarships et cetera, would be $21,327. For that family, based on an income of $100,000—the previous scheme would have cut out much earlier—youth allowance would be $17,338. I know there have been some issues about what the minister said concerning the $140,000 figure, but in a family with an income of $138,000 and two students, one in year 1 and the other in year 2, student 1 would get $6,250—I do not think that has changed—and student 2 would get $3,250, plus the nominal youth allowance amount. Anyone gaining one dollar of youth allowance will access the scholarships, so the system is different.

It seems to me that the coalition wants the best of the old system and the best of the new system and is saying, ‘Hang what’s in the middle.’ What we have to do is look very closely at what this means to parents and students, not to politicians. This is a critical time for those people. I would urge senators, particularly Senator Fielding, to have a close look at this and to work through some examples. I had talks with Steve Fielding last year about possible ways to assist this legislation to get through the parliament—to get both sides to agree. It is not perfect and it probably never will be, but there are parts of it that are better than the old scheme—much better. There is still the issue, Minister—and, as I said, it is a legitimate issue—of country kids who are going to find great difficulty getting that 30 hours a week. I know there are some averaging provisions now, but it still leaves a gap. I understand that most of those kids will access youth allowance through their family incomes, but there is a group of students who are still going to find it difficult—students who cannot live at home, who have no university next door and who will have to leave home both to find work and to go to university. I think that is the grey area that really needs some consideration. If negotiation can take place in that area, I think it would be appreciated. (Time expired)

See this speech in context