House debates
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Income Support for Students) Bill 2009 [No. 2]
Consideration of Senate Message
6:24 pm
Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source
On the question of the delivery of these benefits, opposition members now say there is something with wrong with the index. Well, it is their index. Then we had the member for Hinkler suggest that somehow it is neglectful that my department or my office did not come up with a purpose-specific map of Australia for student income support. It is a pretty tough thing to do when the first time the opposition ever raised with us that they would accept a geographic division of the country on these questions was last Tuesday. How was one to do a purpose-specific map from last Tuesday? Obviously, we used the map that is across government. The change to the map—the so-called great victory that the opposition have had on all of this—is to change the circumstances for 1,900 students in a revenue neutral change that is being paid for with a small reduction in student start-up scholarships. They fought all these months, caused all these uncertainties, promulgated a billion dollar plan; they have settled for an amendment of less than $100 million for 1,900 students.
I conclude by saying that, in respect of the coalition contributions, they say this is not enough. Well, if they do not think it is enough, make a promise to the electorate that if they are elected as the government at the next election they will spend half a billion or a billion more to deliver what they say they want to deliver. The only political promise from the opposition at the moment is that, in government, they would have a review. Every opposition member who has spoken in this debate and said they would fix this in government is not telling the truth. The only thing that they have committed to is a review. All of this expectation raising and now they are walking away from the students whose expectations they have raised. It is a dreadful and cruel hoax.
I conclude by thanking the people who have worked hard on this package in my department and ought not to have been the subject of criticism in this debate: Robyn Shannon, Diane Peacock, Alison Moorehead, Colin Caldwell, Oliver Caddick, Robert Grew, Brett Harris, Danny Edmonds and Marg Simmons. And of course thanks to my own staff, particularly to Jim Round, for their work on delivering these beneficial changes for Australian students.
Question agreed to.
No comments