Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

To resume my speech: with respect to the state-by-state modelling for unmet demand, I understand that my colleague Senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore has sought the production of the documents. It is quite unacceptable for this parliament to be expected to vote on such reforms when such critical information is not available. However, the evidence before us does tell us that there is possibly a more meaningful way to address addiction. Experts also tell us that income management as a first step when a person reports that they need help would drive away participants and recipients from self-reporting. In turn, this will make it more difficult to do what I believe the government does want to do—that is, better assist every person receiving the jobseeker payment to be free of addiction and to be job ready.

Schedule 4 no longer provides for drug or alcohol addiction as a reasonable excuse. This can only be a reasonable excuse if we accept that drug or alcohol addiction is a barrier to employment, and then ensure that we provide the pathways to rehabilitation for the participant. As I have previously said, it is reasonable to expect a jobseeker to look for work or to take steps to address the barriers that stop jobseekers participating in looking for work or employment activities. Equally, we as a society must provide as many supports and pathways as possible to assist people to beat their addiction.

Schedule 15 provides for targeted compliance. I accept that we should place expectations on jobseekers to be activated and engaged. I do believe, though, that the compliance framework should include income management as a last resort after all demerit points have been exhausted and before the cutting of payments. There is a fine balance with mutual obligations, and I would like to see debate to consider what recipients' further chances should be before payments are removed, as this would cause detrimental financial impact and possibly adverse or unintended consequences, such as a person turning to crime as they see no other option. I think we must look at this legislation and at these clauses from the point of view not just of the individual recipient but of families, and many of these recipients do have families. As this clause stands, ultimately we could possibly be depriving children of food in the cupboard.

In closing, I cannot support this bill in its entirety as it currently stands. I and my colleagues will continue discussions with the government in good faith, and my Senate colleagues will examine this bill in greater detail. We all want every Australian jobseeker to have every opportunity to address barriers, find employment and achieve happiness and prosperity. This goal is not beyond being realised.

See this speech in context