Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

The cruelty of the Abbott government's budget knows no bounds. This legislation is just another example of how out of touch those opposite are with what goes on in the real world. I have just come from a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition and a couple of constituents from the ACT, Michaela and Lauren and, between them, their three children. In that meeting we discussed the impact of the budget on their day-to-day lives—on their cost of living, on their futures, on their education. Those women expressed considerable concern about a range of measures that are in this budget.

First up, was the deregulation of higher education and also the costs that are going to be imposed to those seeking to improve their lives, who aspire to higher education. Lauren talked about the fact that she is really concerned about this. She can cope with a $50,000-HECS debt, but what she is really concerned about is the prospect of a $100,000- or $200,000-higher education cost where the interest goes up. She is very, very concerned about what that is going to mean. She is a single mum. She is aspiring for a better future for her son and herself. She is doing all the right things. She has a part-time job and is seeking a degree through the higher education system—she is starting a law degree. She is fearful and terrified about the prospect of her HECS debt being in the range of $100,000-$200,000.

Just recently—last week, actually—I held two community forums. One was in Griffith; the other was in Woden. One of the messages that came from those community forums was concern by one woman whose daughter is aspiring to study medicine. She is incredibly concerned about the fact that her daughter's degree is not going to cost the $50,000 that Lauren mentioned but in the vicinity of $400,000. She is really concerned about the fact that a $400,000 debt means that her daughter will be incapable of ever aspiring to own a home. With a debt of that magnitude hanging over your head, how can young Australians—those who are undertaking higher education—expect to save up for a home with a debt like that? This is the concern that this woman has expressed about her daughter's future—not just because of the fact that she has a huge debt hanging over her head but also that she could potentially not aspire, like most Australians, to own her home. Also, this woman is concerned about the fact that this debt is probably going to be dogging her daughter until she is in her 50s.

The women I met today also expressed great concern about the fact that the fuel tax is going to have a huge hit on their cost-of-living expenses each week. As Michaela said, 'It is not just the fact that I use the car to go to and from work—and that is going to have a hit on my day-to-day, or weekly, budget—but also the fact that I do a lot of running around, dropping the kids off at child care and running around town dropping kids off at the doctor.' It is going to have a huge hit on her cost-of-living expenses.

They are incredibly concerned about the GP tax and also the increase in the costs of scripts. Like any parent with young children, they are at the doctor quite frequently. Each time they go to the doctor, there is going to be an extra slug on the cost of those expenses. They are very concerned about what is going to happen to them. They understand that the budget that the Abbott government has imposed or wants for the Australian people and wants for the people of Canberra is completely out of touch with reality. It is completely out of touch with the real lives of Australians and of Canberrans.

The bill we are debating today is a bill that seeks to punish people for being unemployed rather than support them back into the workforce. This bill—Social Security Legislation Amendment (Stronger Penalties for Serious Failures) Bill 2014—amends changes that Labor made in government to ensure that job seekers who suffered a penalty for not actively seeking work or training were encouraged to re-engage in their search for a job and to seek employment and training. Under the current job seeker compliance provisions, job seekers receiving a payment such as Newstart may incur an eight-week non-payment penalty for serious failures consisting of either their refusal of suitable work or persistent non-compliance with their participation obligations. However, these non-payment penalties may be waived if the job seeker then begins to comply with the serious failure requirement, such as by working for the dole, doing job search training or undertaking more intensive job searches. The non-payment period may also be waived if the job seeker did not have the capacity to comply with the serious failure requirement and would be in serious financial hardship if the non-payment period was not ended.

These provisions are important as they encourage job seekers to re-engage in the process after non-compliance by allowing the non-payment period to be ended if the job seeker re-engages with their participation obligations. The decision on when to waive his penalty is at the discretion of the Department of Human Services. It is not a one-size-fits-all model. And the department makes a decision on the individual circumstances of each job seeker. This bill provides that job seekers who incur an eight-week non-payment penalty for refusing suitable work will no longer be able to have the penalty waived at all. Job seekers who persistently fail to comply with participation obligations will only be allowed to have the penalty waived once using the same criteria during each period of continuous receipt of their participation payments.

In other words, these changes discourage job seekers from re-engaging in their search for work. In fact, as the government has confirmed, job seekers will actually not be able to re-engage at all during the eight-week non-payment period, and their participation obligations will cease during this period. Even if a job seeker wanted to re-engage during the non-payment period, this government has effectively prohibited them from doing so.

The Abbott government, despite all of its rhetoric about earn or learn, is essentially giving up on these people and on these job seekers. Who are these changes going to affect? In the true form of the Abbott government's budget, these changes, like so many others, will have the biggest impact on those who can least afford it. Many of these job seekers who are likely to have a penalty applied will already have been identified by Centrelink as having some vulnerability indicators—that is, they are likely to have a mental illness, be at risk of homelessness, have experienced a recent traumatic that relationship or have some other vulnerability. These are some of the most vulnerable people in our society and these are the people whom this government wants to punish for being unemployed rather than encourage to re-engage in the search for work.

We should be helping and providing more support, not less, to our most vulnerable job seekers. It should be noted that the numbers we are talking about here are very small: 1,718 out of more than 600,000 people on Newstart and other payments have been deemed to have refused a suitable job. This is not some sort of chronic problem plaguing our welfare system, as those opposite would have you believe. It is very small number of job seekers. Labor believes we should be working to re-engage these people, not encouraging them to sit back and do nothing for eight weeks.

This bill must be taken in the broader context of the Abbott government's attack on job seekers and the unemployed, the worst aspect of which is, in my opinion, the Abbott government's proposed draconian measures preventing young people from accessing Newstart for six months. Those opposite believe unemployed people under the age of 30 should survive for six months with no income, while applying for 40 jobs a month. How they can do that I do not know. How do those opposite think someone can apply for 40 jobs a month when they do not have enough money to feed themselves, let alone pay for their internet connection or the local paper, or pay for the petrol or bus fare to get to the interview. I just do not know how they expect that to happen. This government also proposes to push young people under 24 from Newstart onto the youth allowance. This is a cut of $48 a week or almost $2,500 a year and is yet another attack on young people. For those people shifted from Newstart to youth allowance, this represents an almost 20 per cent cut in support.

Last week I held two community forums, as I mentioned earlier in my speech. One was in Griffith, the other was in Narrabundah. At both forums there was real concern about these two measures, which are seen as an attack on our youth and on the fabric of Australian society. Australians, Canberrans, understand the fact that the support mechanisms we have established in the system are designed to help those in need. Australians understand that we need to reach out and provide support to those people who are doing it tough. It is part of the Australian DNA. It is part of our social democratic system, part of our values, part of who we are as Australians. Those opposite do not understand that at all. You can see that from the attacks they have made on the quality of life and the cost of living of the women I met today. The Newstart proposals we are debating today underscore those attacks. There is no concern for the vulnerable. There is no concern for those most in need. There is no concern for those who are disadvantaged. There is no concern for the youth of our country who are our future.

At my community forums, my mobile offices and the doorknocking I have been doing since the budget was released but also prior to the budget, the two major issues raised apart from jobs are the attack that this government has made on the Public Service and the attack that this government has made on Canberra, our nation's capital. The government has a complete disdain for the nation's capital and wants to move jobs out of Canberra.

The nation's capital was set up as the seat of government and the seat of parliament. It was set up specifically for the purpose of having government agencies here to advise government as part of our nation's capital. This government has complete disdain for Canberra. Apart from under Sir Robert Menzies, conservative governments in recent years have always had a complete disdain for Canberra. We see it in the fact that they want to get rid of 16½-thousand public servants. In 1996 the Howard government got rid of 15,000 public servants here in Canberra and 30,000 public servants right across the nation. Do you know what that did to Canberra, Deputy Speaker? What it did to Canberra was send us into an economic slump for five years. It saw house prices plummeting. It sent bankruptcies, both personal and business, skyrocketing. People left town. It had a huge impact on the region. It had a significant effect on businesses—businesses went under, local shops closed down. That is the future that this government wants for Canberra, for our nation's capital.

At my community forums, real concern was expressed about this government attacking the notion of Canberra as the nation's capital and also, through that, attacking public servants. They are the servants of democracy. They choose a career in the Public Service, they have an altruistic purpose in their life, they want to make a difference to this nation, and all this government does is attack and attack and attack their home town as well as their jobs by cutting, cutting, cutting. At the community forums and the doorknocking, the job cuts were very much front of mind for the community.

I also found through my doorknocking and mobile offices and my community forums that Canberrans have expressed significant concern about the fact that higher education for their children could cost between $100,000 and $200,000. As I said, one woman mentioned that her daughter is potentially facing a $400,000 debt. People are particularly concerned about the cuts to Newstart. This is a cut to the social fabric of Australia. We have a society that allows people to have aspirations, to reach out for opportunities and reach their full potential, but our society is also one where we have a safety net to support those who are facing tough times. This government is attacking all of that. People are very concerned about the higher education changes. They are very concerned about the Newstart changes. They are very concerned that this government wants to impose a GP tax every time they go to the doctor. They are very concerned about the increases in the fuel tax. They are very concerned about the changes that will increase the cost of scripts. The key message that came from my community forums, my doorknocking and mobile offices is that Canberrans are not happy with this government. They are very unhappy, in fact, with the attacks that this government has made on Australia's social fabric and on Canberra's social fabric. They are also very unhappy about the complete disdain the government has for this nation's great capital.

Unemployed people should not be punished for being unemployed. They should be supported into work, training and education for future work. Unemployment is a serious issue, but this government's policy seems to be to punish the unemployed, without any focus on actually creating any jobs. Programs by government should be focused on job creation, on ensuring people have the right skills, the right training and the right education for jobs now and for the jobs of the future. Governments should be continuing programs that worked, like Youth Connections and the partnership brokers program, both of which have been cut in this budget. Labor does not support this bill, because we recognise that punitive measures designed to force people into employment will not work where there are no jobs available. It is simply punishment for punishment's sake. (Time expired)

See this speech in context