Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to commence my contribution to the debate on the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Budget Repair) Bill 2015 where the member for Greenway ended hers, and that is by saying that I have been approached by older people in my community on many occasions—and on an increasing number of occasions in recent times—because they have become very distressed about the way that the government has treated them. They have made the same statement to me—that they have made an enormous economic contribution to Australia throughout their working life; they have paid their taxes; they have always worked; they now support their family and provide child care, as the member for Greenway was talking about; and they still engage in the community, work as volunteers and do so many different things to support not only their family but the community and our Australian society. They have felt very marginalised by the Abbott-Turnbull government.

An ongoing theme through all the amendments to the social security legislation is that the government has been targeting the most vulnerable people in our community and particularly older people. If I have one message to those on the other side of this House, it is: value the older people in your communities, value the contribution they have made in the past and value what they are still contributing to our society. When you as members of a government and when the Prime Minister as head of that government and the Treasurer are looking for savings, do not immediately go to pensioners and older Australians to bring about those savings. Look wider. Maybe you need to look a little bit at some of the superannuation loopholes that exist and some of the loopholes that multinational companies are exploiting, rather than targeting pensioners. I need to put on the record too that every single change which the government makes within the area of pensions and every single change that it makes which impacts on the lives of older Australians actually creates feelings of insecurity, uncertainty and vulnerability. Those older Australians really feel marginalised by this government.

In the last election, many older Australians supported the Abbott-Turnbull government, but they have become extremely disillusioned by the actions of this government and the changes it has made. I would be happy if they were not disillusioned and they still could enjoy the things that they were enjoying before the last election. But, unfortunately, the Abbott-Turnbull government has waged a vendetta against older Australians, and I am terribly, terribly disappointed about it.

If I could turn to the legislation that we have before us today, there are three main aspects of it. I will start with the aspect that the member for Greenway was talking about—that is, the fact that the government is looking at reducing the time that certain pensioners can stay overseas and still receive their full pension from 26 weeks to six weeks. This has created a lot of concern in my electorate. A lot of people in the Shortland electorate were either born overseas or have families overseas. I have been approached by a significant number of pensioners who have raised this issue with me, particularly in relation to the area of caring. I very recently had a constituent come to see me to talk about how she has an ailing parent overseas and her fear that the changes to the legislation will impact her pension, which she totally relies on for financial support. She is very, very concerned about this. Once again, this measure is creating anxiety, uncertainty and fear, and I know in electorates like that of the member for Greenway that this would be magnified by hundredfolds.

The cuts in this bill originated with former Prime Minister Tony Abbott; they were in his unfair budget, which we have all heard so much about. People thought the current Prime Minister would actually change things, be a little more receptive and understand that people rely on the government to create certainty and for financial support. They thought that he would understand, but they have been extremely disappointed. When I am out at the shopping centres, as I have been, I have had people come up to me and point out that they thought Prime Minister Turnbull would be different from Prime Minister Abbott. They thought he would be more compassionate. They thought he would understand the difficulties that pensioners and families were confronted with each and every day. The message that they have given me is that the government and the Prime Minister have changed but every key policy is still exactly the same—and that is what they do not like.

They do not like the fact that the government is targeting the most vulnerable people in the community, particularly the measure that goes to the heart of reducing the time that people can spend overseas and still receive their full pension. It is having an enormous impact on communities throughout Australia, and the government needs to understand this. The government needs to understand the personal and cultural implications of this measure rather than just pushing ahead with it and seeing social security and vulnerable people as a quick fix when it comes to plugging up their budget deficit—which, I might add, has tripled since they came to power; it increases each and every day. We find with this government that there is a lot of talk about budget black holes, but that hole is getting so deep that we cannot see the bottom of it. The only way that the government is looking to address the budget deficit is by attacking the most vulnerable people in our community. Quite frankly, as a member of parliament who represents a lot of older people, I find that totally unacceptable. I believe that in the Shortland electorate, which has the 9th oldest demographic in the country, people have been very disturbed by the way that the government has been targeting older people.

I now want to touch on the abolition of the pensioner education supplement. This supplement is between $31 and $61 a fortnight and is determined by the type of course and the level of study that a person undertakes. It helps in particular people on disability support pensions and carers payment who are studying. I would like to put this in perspective: I previously worked as a rehabilitation counsellor, with people who had disabilities and who were keen to retrain in an area in which they could work and which would be within their physical capabilities. These were generally people who had worked in a more manual or physical occupation before injuring themselves. This sort of supplement helps them when they are studying: it makes it much more affordable. If the government pushes this measure through it will mean that 41,30 people will lose this supplement. There is no surprise to this, I suppose, in that three-quarters of the recipients are women and this government's policies in the area of women has not been the best. The number of women on the frontbench and the number of women involved in key decision areas has not improved under this government. We know that, yet again, this measure will impact women.

The other measure in the bill is the abolition of the education entry payment. Around 87,000 people received this payment back in 2013-14. It is a payment of $2,008 a year for the purpose of assisting people with study costs. When you are on a pension or any form of income support, you struggle to get the dollars to be able to study. We should be assisting people in every way we possibly can, but this government is more inclined to put in place barriers and disincentives for people wanting to undertake studies that will then lead them to entering the workforce. We hear a lot of talk from those on the other side about the best form of welfare being work. We all agree with that. I agree with that 100 per cent. But, along the way, before you can actually access work, there is a pathway to work and that pathway involves study and training. Unfortunately, this government is not prepared to help people traverse that pathway.

I would have to say that I am really disappointed that we have a government that has no compassion and that lacks the understanding of the impact of its most basic decisions has on the lives of people. I cannot support this legislation; I cannot support legislation that will stop pensioners visiting and caring for their families for more than 26 weeks; I cannot support legislation that will lead to the abolition of the pension education supplement, which is so vital for those people who are undertaking studies; and I certainly cannot support legislation that is going to abolish the education entry payment. This government stands condemned for its lack of compassion and understanding.

See this speech in context