Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I speak in relation to the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Fair and Sustainable Pensions) Bill 2015. What an Orwellian title—'fair and sustainable pensions'—when the whole purpose of the legislation is not to put $2.43 billion back in the pockets of pensioners but to rip away $2.43 billion out of the pockets of pensioners. If you listen to the contributions made by the member for Longman and the member for Forde—what courageous contributions they have made in the context of places like Beenleigh and Caboolture. I look forward to seeing the DLs and I look forward to seeing the newsletters that they send out to their constituents in relation to the cuts to the pension that their constituents will receive.

This bill signals a resumption of the Abbott government's attack on Australian age pensions—an attack which commenced, surprisingly, in its first budget in 2014. It reintroduces a number of measures which the government has been unable to legislate for. It introduces measures in this budget which, according to the government, will see 236,000 pensioners worse off by an average of $130 per fortnight or $3,380 per year. Australian pensioners feel aggrieved. They are angry. They were angry at the last budget, but they feel betrayed—betrayed by a government which said one thing before the election and did exactly the opposite after the election.

For example, who would ever forget the now Prime Minister being interviewed live from Penrith football stadium when he promised no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no changes to the pension, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS. So far, it is only the GST that has been able to avoid the Abbott stamp of cuts. Pensioners remember, of course, AM on ABC radio on 5 September 2013, when he said, solemnly:

… I can assure your listeners that there will be no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no cuts to pensions, no change to the GST …

No cuts, no change: these were the words of the future Prime Minister.

Pensioners would think that was probably true, because that blue brochure—Real Solutionswhich Liberal Party candidates and Nationals candidates took around the country was like the Bible to them. They paraded it everywhere. In fact, the future Prime Minister used to hug it—he used to hold it to his chest as if somehow it was a badge of honour! It was definitely going to happen; it was the holy Scriptures for the Liberals and Nationals, who would come into government—and this was what they would do. Nothing about cuts to pensions or changes to pensions was ever forecast in that document. If it were a Biblical text, there was no prophecy in it about what would happen! Pensioners could wade through all the pages of that glossy brochure and they would think that there were no dark plans for their pensions. But, guess what? It did not last.

It is very simple: after the 2013 election promised nothing in terms of changes they learned the brutal truth last year, in 2014. And this bill has to be seen in the context of the 2014-15 budget, because the coalition parties in government broke their promises. The Prime Minister broke his promise—his solemn pledge—to the Australian public. They said that in 2017 they would move the indexation of pensions solely to CPI. That is what they said. Now, all of the members opposite on the government benches know the anger. I have been to a number of their electorates and done forums, and I can say that the anger was palpable amongst those aged pensioners and seniors. They were furious. They knew the consequences of $23 billion being ripped away from their household incomes—$80 less a week within 10 years would be their lot in life. They knew it; they knew that the government had not respected them. They had expected to live in financial dignity in retirement but they were having money ripped away.

They knew it and they let the government know it. Labor stood firm here and in the other chamber. We campaigned ferociously on this and the government knew that they could not sustain it. So they went back to the drawing board and withdrew it. They went back to the drawing board—not, by the way, for making Australians work until 70 years of age; that is still their policy. But the Prime Minister went back to the drawing board on this and so did the Treasurer.

Surely government backbenchers understand what this bill that is before the chamber says? It says that 330,000 pensioners will be worse off and that more than 90,000 pensioners currently on a part pension will lose that pension. You can imagine that there are people who they know who will be affected. There are people in their Liberal and Nationals party branches who will lose this money.

Those opposite know that there are retired small-business operators, retired police officers, retired schoolteachers and retired nurses—people who have worked hard for a living—who are going to lose out. They have put some money away, they have modest incomes and they have modest assets. The Leader of the Opposition outlined some of those assets today—furniture, paintings, a fishing licence, a tinnie or a couple of cars. That is all taken into consideration outside the home. So they are in a position where they have a modest income and modest assets. If they are a single pensioner with more than $289,500 in assets they will have their part pension cut. If they are a pensioner couple with more than $451,500 in assets they will have their part pension cut.

All the money in those assets may not necessarily be geared as income-producing assets. That is what the Leader of the Opposition said. But the Prime Minister and Treasurer would have you think that these people are millionaires—that they are rich. They are engaging in some sort of socialist class warfare over there. It is not. In fact these are average working Australians who have worked hard all their lives, and this government intends to rip that away.

A single age pensioner who owns their home and who has a super income of less than $25,000 a year will lose $8,200 of their $11,800 part pension. How will they survive if they have that level of cut to their income? And an age pension couple who own their own home and receive a combined income of $45,000, with $450,000 each in superannuation, will lose their entire combined part pension of $11,400 per year. That is a second-hand car, a holiday, birthday presents or a new fridge or freezer. We are not talking about rich people here; we are talking about people who battled all their lives and put money away.

But those opposite think that these people are wealthy. It will come back to haunt them. More than 1 million retirees will have their pension cut, including about 700,000 people who are about to retire who are between, say, 50 and 65 years of age. They are going to retire. They are going to make decisions to adjust their financial affairs and put money away to retire. But they are going to have their assets cut in the future. The members opposite have talked about COTA and National Seniors supporting this. They have not come out and supported these cuts, because they know the impact it is going to have. We know the impact because we have seen reports done by Rice Warner Actuaries for Industry Super Australia. They reveal that the cuts will affect about 700,000 people who will retire in the next 10 years. The cuts will hurt couples 10 years from retirement. If they have an income of, say, $62,000 a year, which is about 80 per cent of average income, they will lose out. Those couples will lose $4,300 each per year, or about $112,000 over their retirement. For couples 20 years from retirement the cuts will hurt those on lower incomes, with couples earning as little as $45,000 set to lose $1,500 each year.

People say there is no difference between the major political parties. This debate shows there really is. Those people on the left of the political spectrum who want to support the Greens are shown what the Greens are really like. We have seen in this place the Greens not support an emissions trading scheme with the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. When we tried to take action in relation to people smugglers and the Malaysian solution, the Greens sided with the coalition parties. The Greens sided with the coalition parties on the debt ceiling. And now they are siding with the Coalition parties again. What for? They are doing it to get an extension in relation to an inquiry. They have been sold out. They have been completely hoodwinked by the coalition. The coalition are good used car salesmen. They have sold the Greens a real dodgy lemon here; they really have. And the Greens accept it. I cannot believe that the Greens are so stupid as to accept this particular proposition. This shows that only Labor will protect pensioners. That is what it clearly shows.

There are so many pensioners living in our constituencies who are going to lose out. In my electorate there are just over 14,000 age pensioners. They are going to be affected by these cuts. There are 5,120 part pensioners in my electorate. They are going to be impacted by these cuts. This is a savage attack by the coalition parties on their savings. We on this side will fight for them. We will hold the government to account for these broken promises. This is a government that breaks promises and breaks them regularly. The two budgets they have done so far are full of broken promises. The people will hold the government to account when it comes to the ballot box. We will continue to fight for pensioners. We have suggested sensible changes to superannuation. We have adopted about $1.5 billion in savings as well. The government claims it is not impacting on superannuation but it is ripping away the low-income superannuation contribution for people earning up to about $37,000 a year. It is knocking off $500 a year. It is making those people pay more in superannuation contribution in terms of tax than they actually earn by way of PAYE paid in income tax. How sensible is that? It is dumb. Those opposite take away the rebate for the lowest earners. They attack pensioners who are the lowest income earners on the savings that they are trying to rely on. But they do nothing about multimillionaires in terms of superannuation, when they know very well that we are in a situation where in the next four years superannuation concessions will exceed the pension system in this country. They want to talk about fair and sustainable pension systems. We have a situation where 38 per cent of all super tax concessions go to the wealthiest 10 per cent. They want to be modern-day socialists over there—Trotskyites—and attack the wealthy in terms of pensions. How about they do the constructive thing and make the pension system sustainable? Support it but also make sure the superannuation system is more sustainable.

I heard the member for Longman lauding the Labor Party for bringing in superannuation. Since I have been in this place the coalition parties have never voted for an increase in the superannuation guarantee. They opposed superannuation being brought in in the first place in the Hawke and Keating years. They have opposed it every single time. They have put off the increase in the superannuation guarantee again and again and frozen it. They cannot come in here and say, 'We're going to protect superannuation; we're all in favour of superannuation', when they keep on voting against increases in superannuation. They have never supported superannuation. They used to call it a rort or a con. What platitudes they speak about the fact that they are supporting superannuants. They are not. Their record clearly shows that this is an attack on pensioners. If this were not an attack on pensioners, if this were really supporting pensioners as they claim it is, then it would be a $2.43 billion payment to pensioners, not $2.43 billion taken away from pensioners. That is what the record shows, and that is what this bill shows. That is why it is not fair and it is not sustainable. The title of this bill is Orwellian. This bill should be opposed. All of those members opposite who are in marginal seats should have a good look at themselves. They have been hoodwinked, like the Greens, by their frontbench and by the Prime Minister's office. They should not support this legislation.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context