Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Communications) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in opposition to the measures contained in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Budget Repair) Bill 2015. The measures that are proposed contain a lack of consultation and display quite a lack of an evidence base, quite frankly, not to mention that the substance of the proposed changes includes a wide range of highly inequitable changes that will hurt hardworking Australians who are being punished by the Liberal government.

The bill does a range of things including reintroducing measures from the 2015 budget—specifically, changes to the proportional payment of pensions outside Australia. It also reintroduces measures contained in the 2014 budget—the hit that it was—that the government has been unable to legislate: abolition of the pensioner education supplement and abolition of the education entry payment.

It also reintroduces a measure contained in the 2014 budget, previously introduced in the No. 4 bill and reintroduced in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Youth Employment and Other Measures) Bill 2015, which was negated at the second reading stage in the Senate on 9 September 2015. These changes are: maintain at level for three years the income-free areas for all working-age allowances other than student payments and for parenting payment single from a new start date of 1 July 2016; and maintain at level for three years the income-free areas and other means test thresholds for student payments, including the student income bank limits, from 1 January 2016.

As the shadow minister for citizenship and multiculturalism, I want to specifically focus on the changes to the proportional payment of pensions outside Australia. That is because of the impact that this measure will have on people from migrant backgrounds. I believe that this government has grossly misunderstood and underestimated the impact that this is going to have on a substantial number of people in our community and the outcry that is going to arise as a result. As shadow minister and member for Jagajaga has stated, Labor will not be supporting this bill and this most unfair measure that has already resulted, as I have said, in an outpouring of opposition from many organisations and the community in general.

I will now turn specifically to the proportional payment of pensions outside Australia. Travelling overseas in retirement is often the reward for working hard your entire life, and it is under threat from this government through this bill. Australia is a migrant country, a country enriched by the contributions of those from all over the world. Indeed, about one in four Australians were born overseas, and it is often the case that in retirement these Australians plan on visiting the place of their birth for a holiday or to see loved ones. Currently, pensioners can stay overseas for 26 weeks and receive their full pension. Following that time, the pension is reduced to a rate that depends on the number of years the pensioner has worked in Australia. Under the government's proposal, from January 2017 that 26 weeks will be reduced to six weeks, after which a pension recipient's payment will be proportionalised. After six weeks the payment will be adjusted according to the length of the pensioner's Australian working-life residence.

I find it difficult to believe that the government can even be certain about the costing of this proposal. There have been huge assumptions seemingly made about the deterrence impact of this measure. I look forward to further scrutiny of these provisions in the near future. It appears that the savings measures contained in this bill have been derived from the breach. There are questions about this that many soon-to-be-affected people are rightly asking me.

I understand travel is expensive and so when Australian pensioners who have relocated travel overseas to see elderly relatives or perhaps visit their children or grandchildren or go to their home village they want to do so for a longer period. I think that is fair enough. That is why Labor will not support this harsh measure which punishes Australians who have worked hard their entire lives and want to enjoy their retirement.

I also think this measure completely ignores the significant contribution this cohort of people have made to our society. Put simply, it is a cruel and punitive measure. This decision, in essence, creates a two-tier system. It unfairly targets Australian pensioners who have family overseas. We know nearly 40 per cent of those receiving the age pension were not born in Australia, but they have worked hard and contributed to our society and now are going to be punished because they want to visit loved ones overseas.

As the member for Cunningham would well know, particularly when you are looking at established migrant communities, these are people who have maintained strong roots in their country of birth. Travelling back there is something that they look forward to. They do not do it on a regular basis, I would say, but certainly on a reasonable basis. Particularly if you are going to be travelling to the Northern Hemisphere, you are going to want to stay for a reasonable period of time. I do not think it is unreasonable to expect that people will do this. People do. People in my family do it, and I know the member for Cunningham has many constituents who are in the same position.

See this speech in context