Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

Centre Alliance supports the passage of the Treasury Laws Amendment (2019-20 Bushfire Tax Assistance) Bill 2020 and acknowledges that the bill seeks to minimise the financial impact of the bushfires through three stages. The bill provides tax relief to individuals and businesses who receive a disaster relief payment, provides a specific income tax exemption for compensation payments made to volunteer firefighters and gives DGR status to two trusts established to support families and communities affected by this summer's bushfires.

Schedule 1 of the bill provides tax relief for all disaster relief payments to individuals and businesses impacted by the bushfires. The exemption will extend to disaster recovery allowance payments made to individuals and payments that would otherwise be taxable under the disaster recovery funding arrangements, such as grants that may be made to small businesses and primary producers.

I welcome the Prime Minister's announcement of $2 billion in financial support to help communities recover from the bushfires and for the establishment of the National Bushfire Recovery Agency. But, like so many things, the devil is in the detail. Over the last fortnight it has become quite clear to me that the announced assistance packages may not be filtering down to those who need them most and that business owners, primary producers and even accountants have struggled to navigate the grant application forms. I am also concerned that many primary producers and business owners who were affected by the Cudlee Creek and Kangaroo Island fires either do not fall within the strict grant guidelines or have been placed at a financial disadvantage as a consequence of having taken out insurance policies to minimise the economic impacts of bushfires.

To complicate the matter, these individuals are also often unable to source relief funds from charitable organisations unless they have lost their primary place of residence. While many in the Adelaide Hills region were fortunate to have their homes saved by CFS volunteers or their own farm firefighting equipment, their fodder, livestock, orchards and vines were destroyed, along with their shedding and tanks. Anyone who lives on property knows that shedding and tanks are as vital as the four walls and roof of your home. It's rectifying this damage that requires an urgent injection of funds if we are to maintain our vibrant communities and support local economies.

I wish to raise some issues in relation to the $75,000 grant being made available to primary producers, which is known in South Australia as the PIRSA grant. Firstly, the grant guidelines appear not to permit the purchase of farm firefighting equipment. Farm firefighting units played a vital role, a pivotal role, in defending lives and property on Kangaroo Island and across the Adelaide Hills. Often, CFS trucks just didn't get there; the fire was too enormous and widespread for the CFS to be everywhere. And there is currently no financial support offered to those who seek to purchase, upgrade or even maintain their systems for the remainder of the bushfire season. If we are to encourage preparedness and resilience in the face of worsening conditions, arguably this would be a sensible allocation of funds.

Secondly, the guidelines, by setting the off-farm income threshold at $100,000, do not recognise the unique character of primary production, particularly in the Adelaide Hills. One local accountant I spoke to believes none of his bushfire-affected clients will be eligible for financial support from the government as a consequence of this threshold. Unlike in other locations, many primary producer families in the Adelaide Hills supplement their income through off-farm employment. It's not uncommon for one or both partners to be in full- or part-time employment either in their local community or downhill in Adelaide. Similarly, in the face of worsening growing conditions and declining profits in the agriculture sector, many primary producers in the region have sought to diversify their income by setting up complementary tourism ventures, such as farm produce lines and accommodation. This is particularly relevant to producers on Kangaroo Island. We have been encouraging them for years to have agritourism ventures, and now they are being penalised for that. These primary producers have been operating successful ventures that supplement their modest primary production income—ventures that will no longer be viable without immediate government assistance.

Finally, even if they are eligible, the grant will not meet the costs that are covered by an insurance claim. Accordingly, any claim must be finalised prior to an application being made for the PIRSA grant scheme. This fails to acknowledge the time taken to finalise insurance claims. Dairy farmers, vignerons and farmers I know who are awaiting insurance payments have in many cases been waiting for over six weeks now and are unlikely to receive their payments in the near future. Yet they are unable to access PIRSA grant funds until this occurs and are therefore left without any access to any of the emergency relief funds. In the meantime, they are facing increasing costs in the light of overwhelming demand for fencing and irrigation. One vineyard owner I spoke to was quoted $85,000 for two kilometres of fencing. And a dairy farmer explained to me that every week his fencing quotes were creeping higher and higher. First, it was $10,000 a kilometre and in the next week it was $20,000 a kilometre. He remarked that he had not been insured for that amount and that, if he hadn't been insured, he could simply have taken the PIRSA grant and half of his fencing would have been replaced by now. So primary producers with insurance policies are being disadvantaged by the grant guidelines.

Further to that, if you are a hobby farmer you are not technically a primary producer—if you have 20 acres and you have some horses, a few goats, a few sheep and a bit of a veggie garden—you are not entitled to any of the PIRSA grants. That is placing many in the community at a serious disadvantage. I have previously proposed that the grant guidelines be amended to allow for the provision of an immediate grant of $15,000 pending the finalisation of an insurance claim. The payment could be determined on a case-by-case basis by PIRSA officers. It would at least enable people to buy fodder and remove items that have been destroyed, including vines or trees, and it would provide some limited financial relief from the bushfires. Now is not the time for the government to be concerned about the bottom line. It is an unprecedented disaster and the government should be responding accordingly. The more we delay supporting people to get back on their feet, the longer this recovery is going to take for all of us.

In relation to the $50,000 grant made available to small-business owners, I understand that small-business owners are only eligible if they can demonstrate a loss of stock, equipment or other physical damage as a consequence of the bushfires. The grant does not cover loss of income. The small businesses that are in need of immediate assistance are those that have suffered a loss of income as a consequence of the disruption of their businesses. This is true on Adelaide Hills and Kangaroo Island, particularly for tourism businesses. I understand that concessional loans of up to $500,000 may soon be made available, but I'm concerned that yet again the strict eligibility criteria may mean that many small businesses may not be eligible for this assistance either. Those that are likely to be eligible have said to me that they simply cannot face the prospect of sitting down at the kitchen table to decipher yet another incredibly long, difficult government form.

To support people navigating through this grant pathway I have written to the government to request business counsellors to be based at both the Parndana and Lobethal recovery centres. I understand that experienced business counsellors from the Rural Financial Counselling Service are ready, willing and able to provide such support should the state and federal governments wish to pursue this opportunity. While I think we need them to be based there, they need to outreach. They actually need to go and sit down at the kitchen table with families that have lost everything around their property. They need to be able to meet in a private way and actually support families one on one. I urge the government to review bushfire grant recovery guidelines to ensure that each grant meets the needs of the local communities and that the necessary supports are available to secure the long-term recovery of our bushfire affected regions.

Schedule 2 of the bill relates to payments made to volunteer firefighters and provides a specific income tax exemption for payments intended to compensate for loss of income. In South Australia, volunteer firefighters who are self-employed or employed by a small to medium business who have been called out for more than 10 days may be eligible for financial compensation. This bill ensures that these payments, of up to $300 per day and up to a total of $6,000 per person, are not subject to income tax. I note however that those who have already retired, and therefore do not suffer any loss as a consequence of days absent from employment, will not be eligible for financial compensation, but this does not mean that they did not incur costs as a result of their volunteer efforts. Many retirees are still active members of their local CFS. In fact, across Mayo the majority of people that I meet in our CFS are retired or semiretired, and they do incur costs such as fuel and meals during the course of their volunteer duties. I accept that volunteers do not expect to be paid for their time, but the public expects that the government will take a flexible approach to this reimbursement program and ensure that no volunteer firefighter is left out of pocket no matter their employment status. I think about the length of time fighting these fires that are still going on Kangaroo Island that were only contained; they're not extinguished.

Finally, schedule 3 of the bill provides deductible gift recipient status, otherwise known as DGR status, via specific listing in the income tax law to two trusts to support families and communities affected by bushfires. I have seen firsthand the benefits that flow from granting DGR status to charitable organisations. SAVEM is an emergency responder and animal welfare agency that assesses, triages, treats, shelters and returns, to their owners or to the wild, companion and assistance animals, sport and recreation animals, livestock and, as I said before, wildlife. SAVEM are the only charitable emergency management trained veterinarians in Australia and are much valued by my community and across South Australia, especially by farmers affected. However, the lack of DGR status had frustrated SAVEM's capacity to raise much-needed funds to support livestock owners and wildlife in the wake of the bushfires.

I urged the government to expedite DGR status to SAVEM so that they could more effectively assist farmers. Recognising the genuine need, both the Treasurer and Minister Seselja worked swiftly to make the changes necessary to see DGR status granted to SAVEM within a matter of days. I would like to thank the government and particularly the Treasurer for their assistance.

The granting of DGR status to SAVEM enabled the organisation to attract $300,000 in donations, and that figure continues to rise. Those funds have enabled around 20 fireground-trained vets and nurses to rotate through the firegrounds continuously for 40 days. SAVEM worked closely with the ADF's joint task force, RSPCA, Zoos SA and the South Australian department of environment, water and natural resources. Local vets also worked with them. Together they treated over a thousand animals.

I also want to thank Minister Littleproud for the assistance that he has provided to my community on behalf of the government. The minister has travelled to the Adelaide Hills and seen firsthand the devastation that our community has endured. The minister took the time to meet small-business owners, community leaders, farmers and winemakers in the region. I'm hopeful that the concerns that were raised, some of which I've already spoken about here today, will inform the government's recovery response. I look forward to continuing our collaborative relationship for the benefit of many fire affected communities, particularly mine in Mayo.

Finally, I wish to reflect on statements made in this place during the debate on the condolence motion. We heard stories of devastation and tragedy, but we also heard words of compassion and kindness. Similarly, while I have serious concerns regarding the implementation of the financial assistance offered by the federal government, I am optimistic that as the recovery process continues these matters will be dealt with in a fair and just manner.

See this speech in context