Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

They don't tell us, of course, that since 2013, half of those million jobs were actually given to people on temporary work visas. We don't hear much about that. Minister, we don't hear much about the 1.1 million Australians that are underemployed, that want more work, that need to work more hours and that can't get those hours. We don't hear the inconvenient truth that there are 40,000 more people in the unemployment queue than when your government were elected. That million jobs figure is apparently a smoke and mirrors thing to distract from what's really going on. Buried in those figures, Minister, there are 470,000 Australians that are long-term unemployed. They've been on Newstart for 12 months. It's totally unacceptable.

Newstart, of course, is meant to be a temporary payment; you're not meant to live on it lifelong. But when you're on that kind of money long term, real damage sets in. What do you think a decent government would do? You could be honest that it's too low and say: 'We're going to review the system. We're fiscally constrained; it's tough, but we acknowledge it's a problem and we'll have a look at it.' That's Labor policy. At the very least you could do nothing, Minister. You could say quietly, 'We're not going to look at this at the moment.' But the government's policy is to not even do nothing. They're so arrogant and out of touch that they're still pursuing a cut to Newstart of $8.80 per fortnight, by axing the energy supplement. Let's be very clear, Minister, on why you haven't managed to do this yet. It's because Labor has fought hard for the last two years to protect vulnerable Australians from Newstart cuts. That is the only reason this hasn't happened yet. So it's time for the government, through this budget, to drop your unfair cut to Australians on Newstart. The former Prime Minister wanted to make young people wait for six months before getting any income support, but Labor defeated that cut because Labor believes in a society that protects and invests in people, and not in demonising Australians who need our social security safety net.

I'm going to put clear and specific questions to the minister. You did fail to answer any of my questions last time. I'll give you one out of 10. You didn't mention the pension age of 70. You did say the word 'pension', so we'll word associate and give you one mark out of 10 for that! But I'm going to be optimistic, Minister, even hopeful, that you might answer—a moment of redemption. I did say to the minister in a speech previously that we have something in common; it was a moment of empathy again. We are both scared of the member for Jagajaga!

I'm scared of her—I've known her for 22 years—and you're scared of her—we see it in question time. She's sick today; she's not here, so you can relax. You can settle in, and you can tell the truth. Nothing bad is going to happen. There's no reason to be scared.

My questions, Minister: What is the maximum rate of the energy supplement that someone on Newstart could receive today? What is the current fortnightly maximum payment for a single person with no dependants on Newstart, including the energy supplement? What will be the fortnightly maximum payment for a single person on Newstart if the government's plan to remove the energy supplement for new applicants is successful? How much less will a new applicant receive per fortnight? Isn't it the case that by axing the energy supplement the Turnbull government is essentially cutting Newstart to the most vulnerable? That's a yes/no question. It's pretty much multiple-choice. You've got a 50 per cent chance of getting that one right. We know you're not fully across the detail yet. And how many people on Newstart will see their energy supplement cut?

We have had a bit of this in Senate estimates. You're not there, so maybe we'll get something better from you, Minister, but it tends to go sideways. I know your talking point over there will say somewhere: 'Newstart hasn't changed,' but that is waffle. What we need are answers that talk about the cash that goes into peoples' pockets, because in the real world when you're living hand to mouth—I've doorknocked swathes of my electorate—$10 is a lot of money to people living hand to mouth, and taking $4.40 off people per week is material over the year. You have an opportunity for here for redemption, Minister. You could show that this forum is not as meaningless as question time and actually answer the questions.

See this speech in context