Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It has been a very important contribution today, and it has been excellent having both ministers here, particularly with their pre-existing interest in this field. I think an important role is being played by both sides of parliament today. Both ministers would agree that we have had high acuity questions from the opposition about the user interface with the Public Service and Centrelink in particular. I can understand that they were very important questions—how long you wait; how often the phone hangs up while you are waiting; whether it is 11 minutes or nine minutes that you wait; and how often paperwork is lost. I am sure, Minister, that these would be elements that are very important for us to make sure we are doing as well as possible given the large case load that Centrelink faces.

You then have the other side of the parliament which is, I think ministers would agree, working on how you exit the system in a constructive and productive way, so that we can as Australians aspire for more than a life trapped in welfare and waiting on the phones for a service. Self-evidently, Australians actually aspire to not have to wait on that phone and want to have a shot in the real economy—sending their kids to school and university; attaining a job; and having an opportunity in welfare to work and Work for the Dole. You will see this side of the parliament very much engaged in the high acuity questions around how you leave welfare for something better.

That does not mean that we in any way degrade the Centrelink system and it does not mean you are leaner. 'Leaner' refers, I think, to what is known as a persistent evader—someone who fails to turn up to what are completely reasonable job interviews and Work for the Dole when you are a stream A recipient—already identified as not having the logical and compassionate exclusions that every Australian would expect should exist. There are 74,000 non-attendance measures every year. I would argue to you, Minister, that, if that is occurring over and over again in those 74,000 cases, I think it is quite reasonable to refer that person, who does not think that receiving $728.50 a fortnight is sufficient grounds to turn up to a perfectly reasonable job interview.

Ms Burney interjecting—

I can appreciate that we have some new blood on the opposition benches who appear to have the intellect and the appetite to make the system better. Minister, I have a very important question about this healthy welfare card being trialled in various parts of Australia.

Ms Burney interjecting—

The member for Barton would do well to travel to Ceduna. With an open mind that does not exist with some of her frontbench colleagues, she should go and visit Ceduna and meet those people. Sit down in the dirt or sit under a tree.

Ms Burney interjecting—

The colour of your skin does not matter. Sit down and listen. Keep your ears open and ask them what they think about the welfare card. If you did that with the BasicsCard, instead of just presuming the BasicsCard was unpopular, you would find, Member for Barton, that your own party when they were in government made the BasicsCard non-compulsory and over 50 per cent of holders of the BasicsCard elected to keep it even though it was no longer mandatory. That is a very important signal about the power and the damage of cash.

Minister, we would like to know more about the detailed consultation that occurred with this welfare card. Let's remember that the BasicsCard did come in the sunset of a Howard government era. We implemented a tool that gave the Labor Party in government six years to get it right. But, instead, they walked two sides of the street, telling mainstream Australia that they found it absolutely outrageous that the BasicsCard existed in the Northern Territory and then going up into the Territory and listening but never improving the system. So, on the one hand, you were telling the Northern Territory how made it was and then, back with mainstream Australia, never end it. You could have ended it any time, but you knew that it was working. Hence, we have moved to the healthy welfare card. Minister, it would be very good to know about the technology behind it.

This is not about stigmatising a recipient of welfare; it is about having a commercially available card where they can get the services from vendors in the town in which they live. We need to make sure that gaming is reduced as much as possible. I have seen the Labor Party making much hay about this idea that you can trade out elements of a welfare card and turn it into cash by taking an object back or getting somebody else to purchase something and swapping it. For goodness sake; these are the problems you want to have in Ceduna. The problem you do not want to have is endemic alcohol consumption fuelled by uncontained cash.

Minister, I would like to know what has happened with alcohol consumption in Ceduna. What has happened in the Kimberley? There is evidence of reduced morbidity. Some of these achievements were never even contemplated in their six years of government. For that party over there—Minister, you would have to agree—it was all about the entitlement being available and the user experience being as comfortable as possible, while you are sitting on a phone waiting for a service. (Time expired)

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Treasury Portfolio

Proposed expenditure, $2,642,640,000

See this speech in context