Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise today to support the Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (Election Commitments and Other Measures) Bill 2011. That is a very big name for a bill, Mr Deputy Speaker Kelvin Thomson, but it does a heck of a lot. You and I and many on this side of the House would have gone through our electorates, up hill and down dale, campaigning on these issues before the last election.

What is contained in this bill is, quite frankly, what defines us as being a caring government. The bill does a range of different things. There are five specific matters—five schedules—that are contained in the bill. One deals with work bonuses for seniors. A second increases family tax benefits for children or certain teenagers undertaking secondary studies and living at home. Another deals with the baby bonus, and another with non-budgetary matters relating to thalidomide payments. The final one, schedule 5, deals with income management.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the government recognises the pressures that people are under. Families experience these things week in, week out. You know that; I know that. Anyone who actually bothers to doorknock their electorate will be hearing that in droves. The government recognises the importance that the family unit has, and this bill is designed to alleviate some of those financial pressures in order to help maintain families as cohesive and central to the lives of all people. So the first part of this bill is very important.

During the election campaign, the government committed to expanding the existing seniors work bonus, which allows working aged pensioners to keep working and keep more of their pension when they undertake paid work. Interestingly, I recall very vividly that when we were in opposition there was an employment committee inquiry. We heard from a number of people who described themselves, for want of a better term, as ‘grey nomads’. We heard how they had plenty to offer provided they were not prejudiced in still receiving their pension. I think that is pretty right, and I am sure it makes more sense to speak that way the older and greyer we get.

When passed, this bill will allow pensioners to earn up to $250 a fortnight before their pension is affected, and that is pretty important for them. The schedule will commence on 1 July. The work bonus will provide incentives for receiving extra earnings before the earnings are assessed as income. If a pensioner earns less than $250 in a particular fortnight, they will accrue the credit to their new employment concession, banking up to the value of that $250 in that fortnight. The income bank will then be able to be built up to a maximum of $6,500 and can be offset against the employment income earned at a later period of time.

For anyone who sees what seniors do in our community—working a part-time job or even in semi-paid volunteering work—this is quite significant for all those areas of activity out there where people who see themselves as having time and ability are involved. But they certainly do not want to jeopardise their pension in providing these services. This is something that is very welcome. We know that, because this is what we campaigned on in the last election.

In my federal seat of Fowler I have 23,500 pensioners. They play a really important role in our community—one which should be encouraged. This goes in some measure to rewarding some of their valuable contribution. It is an encouragement and it allows people to continue in paid work at the pace that they elect and in a manner that will not prejudice the application of their pension. As I was alluding to, you cannot put a price on that sort of experience, and this will be a reward for older Australians for using their experience and deploying that experience within our community.

The second matter, again, is a very, very important matter. Apart from the 23,500 pensioners, I have wall-to-wall families in my electorate. This matter is very important for those who have teenage kids in high school. The second part of this bill addresses the issue of supporting families with teenagers. The bill delivers on another key commitment: to increase family assistance to $4,200 a year for teenagers in secondary study. This will be a significant help to families with older children and, at the same time, encourage teenagers to stay at school. Oddly enough, that is a matter I spoke about a little earlier: the issue of school retention rates. Mine is very much a working class suburb, and I see the pressures that families are under. There are certainly pressures on older children, teenagers, to leave school. This bill will help to keep kids in study; it will help families to encourage that, and that is something we need for the future—to increase the school retention rate and help these kids through their training and education to become more job ready and more malleable in a rather dynamic and ever-changing employment market, such as we see around the countryside.

This increase will be a significant help to families with older children. As a parent of three and now a grandparent of five, I am glad to report, I certainly know firsthand—and now see with my children—about financial constraint placed on expanding families and those with older children. We all love our kids, but we have to be realistic that they can be expensive. With today’s pace of life and the pressures we all work under plus the demands our kids make, this bill is aimed directly at taking that financial pressure off families with kids in their teenage years.

Under the existing system, many teenagers opt to leave school early to assist the family. As I said, this has happened to some parents in my own electorate where families experienced financial difficulties. The government recognises that we must assist families with teenagers aged between 16 and 19 who are in full-time secondary study or vocational education. The maximum rate for family tax benefit part A will increase from around $160 a fortnight for teenagers aged between 16 and 19 who are undertaking or engaged in secondary school or vocational education through TAFE or other providers who are exempt from this requirement.

The rate will align to the rate applicable to 13- to 15-year-olds and ensure that government assistance for families does not fall away when children aged 16 and older decide to remain at school. This recognises that with kids turning 16 there is a disproportionate cost, in my humble view—at least there was if I recall my own kids at that magical moment. If anything the costs exponentially start to rise from there on in. It is estimated that this increase will benefit 590,000 families over the next five years. In addition to this increase and family tax benefit part A, families will also be eligible for rent assistance. Currently, when a child turns 16, rent assistance ceases. However, these reforms will provide rent assistance for families with children aged between 16 and 19 who receive more than the base rate of the family tax benefit part A.

Also as a result of these changes, single income families may become eligible for family tax benefit part B if the child moves from youth allowance to the family tax benefit part A. There are some considerable benefits for families. It gives a greater degree of flexibility and, if anything, it is designed to help ensure that families are in a position to encourage kids to stay at school. Families on family tax benefit part A with three or more children may also benefit from the large family support of $295 per annum.

Youth allowance will continue to be available to teenagers aged under 18 years who meet the independence criteria and who need to live away from home in order to attend full-time study or who are not in full-time study or do not meet other eligibility criteria. This bill will include the changes to the youth allowance parental income test to protect the entitlement of youth allowance recipients with a sibling aged between 16 and 19 who remains in or transfers from the family tax benefit system as a result of these new measures.

Another aspect that was campaigned on assiduously before the last election was the baby bonus, the third part of this bill. Another election commitment is being delivered to assist families to support the upfront costs of a new baby. As you are aware, currently the baby bonus is paid in 13 fortnightly instalments. If this bill is passed, from 1 July 2011 the first payment will be $500 more than the other 12 instalments. This will help parents meet upfront costs associated with the arrival of a new baby. Mr Deputy Speaker, as you know, my fifth grandchild was born six weeks ago, so I know the price of baby protection items for cars and the new stroller that does many other magical things as well. These costs are significant, particularly car-carriage arrangements which in today’s society are so essential. I feel for my daughter paying for these although I suspect her mother helped her out greatly. Being able to access that additional $500 payment upfront will be significant.

The other two areas I mentioned at the outset are non-budgetary measures. I have probably left myself too little time to talk about them. One concerns a thalidomide payment. I know the parents of many kids of my generation were introduced to thalidomide. It was a treatment once used as a cure for morning sickness, particularly in the fifties and early-sixties. However, as we know, it has caused an enormous amount of heartache because of birth defects. This bill makes changes to the income tax and social security laws to ensure that these annuity payments are not taken into account or treated as income. Particularly for those who live day in, day out with the effects of thalidomide treatment for their mother, this is something that will certainly be regarded as a welcome relief.

Schedule 5 of the bill deals with the minor changes that the bill will make around income management arrangements. It will clarify when the qualifying period begins for matched savings schemes for payments. It will also clarify the role of the nominees under the income management arrangement and will provide debt recovery arrangements in circumstances where Centrelink has issued a cheque or an income management arrangement on a customer’s behalf. I commend the bill to the House. I think it is something that we should all be proud of, and it was worthwhile having that long campaign. (Time expired)

See this speech in context