House debates
Monday, 31 October 2011
Bills
Social Security Amendment (Student Income Support Reforms) Bill 2011; Second Reading
5:14 pm
Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Hansard source
No, I am not like the rest of them. We have to be answerable for things, and I think you guys have to sometimes as well. Anyhow, earlier this year the Senate passed a coalition bill that would have made it easier for students living in inner regional areas, including Bundaberg, the Coral Coast, Childers and Hervey Bay, to access the allowance. The bill required fair and equitable treatment for regional students in accessing independent youth allowance, and it was something families in my electorate, as I said, were crying out for. Unfortunately, the government reacted by saying the bill was unconstitutional, and in a matter of days the four Independents voted with federal Labor in favour of Labor's then commitment to 'review' the student income support scheme sometime in the future. That was hardly the solution. At that time, the review was slated to report by 1 July of this year, with changes to be operational from 1 January next year. The coalition pushed for the government to act immediately after the review concluded, but the two regional Independents again voted with Labor, which ensured that the time frame between the recommendations and actual changes was not shortened. For the life of me, again—these are two people I respect and get on with—I could never understand why.
The delay, of course, caused great frustration for families living in regional areas. They had to wait until September to hear the fast-breaking news that the government—surprise, surprise—had decided to let inner regional students apply for the independent allowance under the same rules as outer regional, remote and very remote students—in other words, what it was originally and what the coalition had been demanding all along. Specifically, to be able to qualify for the independent youth allowance, students from 'inner regional' areas will have to earn at least $21,009 over an 18-month period or have worked at least 15 hours a week for at least two years after leaving high school. That will be achievable; the other measure was very difficult. So in a nutshell, after to-ing and fro-ing, public debate, legislative changes and the heartache of regional families, we have come right back to where we started from.
What I am pleased to see though, is the ability of 2009 and 2010 school leavers, if they have worked and met the requirements, to qualify for independent youth allowance when these changes come into effect. But to achieve all this, of course, the government has to find savings to offset the costs of the changes, and they come in at around $265 million, comprising: (1) wind-up of the Rural Tertiary Hardship Fund; (2) deferral of measures to extend youth allowance eligibility for masters by coursework students from 1 January 2012 until 1 January 2014; (3) reducing the value of start-up scholarships from $2,194 a year to $2,050 a year from 1 January 2012; and (4) adjusting the amount of the relocation scholarship. Of course, the irony here is that, had the government not changed the independent youth allowance criteria in the first place, they would not have been put in the position where this $265 million was necessary.
That having been said, I return to my original theme. I congratulate Senator Fiona Nash. She did a persistent, well-measured and careful job on this. She led the coalition's National Party and rural Liberal members to a very successful outcome, and I must say I am delighted for all regional Australian students.
No comments