Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be speaking today on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2014-2015, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2014-2015 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2014-2015. A few weeks ago I was at a street stall in the suburb of Greensborough in the heart of my electorate. Extraordinarily, some 10 months after the government's flawed budget was handed down, people are still talking about it. Many people stopped me to raise their concerns over the GP tax and the government's plan to deregulate the higher education system, which is currently being debated in the parliament. The level of outrage in the community over this government's budget is unprecedented in my time in politics. In a little over an hour, around 200 people signed a petition against this government's plans for universities. It did not matter whether they were young or old, everybody I spoke to that day was very concerned about the affordability of higher education. People who had never set foot on a university campus in their lives were adamant that young Australians should have the chance to go to university if that is what they want to do.

So the message I received very clearly that day was that Australians should not be priced out of a university education. Make no mistake: that is exactly what this Liberal government wants to do to Australia's higher education system. It will see a reduction in participation by young Australians in higher education. How on earth does that serve the national interest? How does making it harder for young people to go to university improve the employment prospects of our young people? How is it good for generating economic growth and innovation in our economy? These are the questions which the previous speaker, and in fact the whole of the Abbott government, simply have been unable to answer. It is why we on this side of the parliament, and so many Australians, oppose the government's higher education changes. We will continue to fight for a fair higher education system no matter how hard the government tries to destroy it.

The other big issue that people in my electorate raised with me is jobs, particularly for young people. Of course, many local people are worried about their own jobs. They are worried that if they lose their job there will not be enough new jobs created to help them find employment. Unemployment is still at 6.3 per cent, and, significantly, youth unemployment remains at a stubbornly high 13.9 per cent. The proportion of young people, 15 to 19 years of age, who are looking for work and cannot find it is now almost 4½ times the general unemployment rate—only just off record highs. The Brotherhood of St Laurence recently released its analysis of unemployment data, revealing the scale of the problem. The impact of the global financial crisis on employment has lasted far longer than the impact of the last recession in the early 1990s. It has been more than six years since the global financial crisis, and unemployment remains high.

What is this Liberal government's response to the problem of unemployment rising on their watch? The response is not a jobs plan, as we might have hoped for. In fact, in the budget that was brought down 10 months ago, the government wants to cut young people off from Newstart for six months at a time. I have argued that this is the harshest measure of all in the government's budget. Young people looking for a job will be forced to wait six months before receiving any income support, and in some cases they might cycle through this six months of no income support for many months longer. The government is saying to these young people who lose their jobs or cannot find a job, 'You're on your own.' If, after six months without income support, that young person has not yet found work this measure will require them to take part in Work for the Dole. After the period on Work for the Dole, if they still cannot find work they will lose their unemployment benefit for another six months.

I have been at many pensioner forums around the country recently, and older Australians have expressed to me the concern they have for young people who will find themselves with absolutely nothing to live on—no income support at all. These older Australians really understand that young unemployed people need help to find work, not the sort of punishment that this government wants to deliver. I have never, ever seen a government in Australia abandon its young people in the manner of this Liberal government. Leaving young job seekers with nothing to live on for six months is simply cruel. The government's policy risks confining young Australians to an endless cycle of poverty and despair. It will see young job seekers pushed into crisis and homelessness. In fact, the Department of Social Services last year admitted that they anticipate around 500,000 new claims for emergency assistance as a result of this measure alone.

People are very worried about work, and especially the government's response to rising unemployment. They are worried about the kind of Australia that this government wants to leave for our children: a harder, colder Australia, where it is much more difficult to get ahead; an Australia where it is harder to get an education and harder to find a job, and where the government abandons you when things turn bad. It is not the kind of country that most people want to live in.

Rising unemployment is also, of course, a threat to families—particularly to single-income families already being targeted by this government's cuts to family payments. The government is cutting family payments by $5.5 billion. Of course, that $5.5 billion that the government wants to cut out of family payments will all come out of the pockets of Australian families. The government plans to throw families off family tax benefit part B when their youngest child turns six. As a result of this government's budget, some single-income families on an income of around $65,000 a year will be around $6,000 a year worse off. The Prime Minister has said that he wants to make the government's families package front and centre of the political agenda in 2015. These huge cuts to family payments are front and centre right now, and the government should get rid of them. This is a serious attack on the living standards of Australian families.

On top of all of this, we have seen the government axe $270 million from the Department of Social Services discretionary grants program. This is the money that goes to community organisations that help so many vulnerable Australians, such as people who get help battling homelessness and mental illness, and those recovering from the devastation of bushfires. These organisations were informed via email on the eve of Christmas that they would be losing funding. In my electorate alone, community organisations like Diamond Valley Community Support, Banyule Housing, Banyule Support and Information Centre and Volunteers of Banyule face an uncertain future as result of this government's funding cuts. These organisations provide front-line services to some of the most vulnerable people in my local community. It is just impossible to understand the government's logic behind the callous cuts to these community organisations. It is also impossible to understand why the government decided it would cut funding to disability advocacy groups—groups like the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations, Autism Asperger's Advocacy Australia, Blind Citizens Australia, Deaf Australia, Down Syndrome Australia, and the National Council on Intellectual Disability.

There has been some good news—that the government has decided to grant some transition funding to eight disability organisations. This is a victory for the disability sector, but this funding needs to be made permanent. You only have to look at the government's plan for Australia's retirement system to see this government's appalling policy making. The proposed changes to pension indexation are of course a blatant broken promise. The pension has been benchmarked to wages for 40 years—and for a reason: so that pensioners' standard of living keeps pace with the standard of living of the working population more broadly. John Howard, when he was Prime Minister, knew that. That is why he said:

… enshrining of pension entitlements at 25 per cent of male total average weekly earnings is an important safeguard.

Well, this safeguard is about to be broken by this government, if they get their way.

Pensions should be indexed by whichever is the higher—the consumer price index, male total average weekly earnings or the pensioner index that Labor introduced to provide additional protection to Australian pensioners. The new minister now has had plenty of time to come and explain to pensioners why they deserve to have their pension indexation cut. We have seen the new minister, Minister Morrison, spending a lot of time parading himself around as a contender for the Liberal leadership. I would have thought he should be getting out there to explain to pensioners why he thinks it is okay to take $23 billion out of the pockets of pensioners by 2023-24—$23 billion less will be spent by this government if they get their way in cutting pension indexation. Labor of course will vehemently oppose these cuts.

The former minister, Minister Andrews, despite all his flaws, did explain to the House in 2011 how the wages benchmark 'enabled pensioners to keep ahead of cost of living increases'. So, I call on the new Minister for Social Services to explain why he thinks the current indexation arrangements linking pensions to wage increases are too generous. Why does he think Australian pensioners deserve to have their pensions cut by $80 a week within the next decade? These are figures from the Australian Council of Social Service, who have made clear what will happen to pensions: an $80-a-week cut for pensioners over the next decade if this government gets its way. So many pensioners feel absolutely betrayed by this government. Of course, Labor delivered the biggest increase to the base rate of the pension in the pension's 100-year history.

And that is not all this government wants to do to older Australians. The government wants to increase the pension age to 70, and they have also decided to delay the increase in superannuation that Labor had proposed to see the superannuation guarantee go from nine per cent to 12 per cent. So, this is really what the Liberal Party is saying to Australians: they want you to work longer, and when you finally do get to retire the pension will be worth less, and along the way they are going to deny you the opportunity to save for your retirement during your working life by slowing down the increase in the superannuation guarantee. This is the sort of poor public policy that this Liberal government has become renowned for. Of course, poor public policy is not the only reason the Australian people have lost faith in this government. This Prime Minister promised he would not do so many of these things that are prominent in the budget. The Prime Minister said before the election: 'No cuts to pensions, no cuts to health or education, no cuts to the ABC or SBS, no adverse changes to superannuation and no new taxes'. On every single one of these he has broken his promise to the Australian people, and he will never be believed again.

See this speech in context