Bridget Archer (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

How do you realise aspiration if you're never given the opportunity? This was a comment made to me a few weeks ago by a bright, intelligent young man who believes that the dream of an equal playing field of opportunity is increasingly narrowing in 2023. Lifting our communities out of poverty should be beyond political lines, as it benefits all of us in the long run, but, as we know, the discussion surrounding how this can and should be done, particularly in regard to income support, has long been a political football. This area of complex policy, which has real-life consequences for our communities, too often gets distilled down to simplistic rhetoric on both sides. I want to acknowledge and thank my co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Ending Poverty, the member for Canberra, for working with me as we seriously look to a bipartisan approach on matters relating to poverty and how parliamentarians can meaningfully work together to create change.

Delivering the goal of lifting individuals and communities out of poverty requires the delivery of a wide range of supports and services, and, yes, providing adequate income support plays a significant role. However, as I've said several times before, we can't and won't move the dial on long-term unemployment or intergenerational unemployment if we don't have wider reform. But more on that later. To the matter at hand, as someone who's lobbied my own side while in government for an increase in JobSeeker, I of course support the $40-a-fortnight increase proposed by the government, which also extends to recipients of youth allowance, partnered parenting payment, Austudy and youth disability support pension. I also support the increase in rent assistance and the proposed expansion in eligibility for the higher rate of JobSeeker payment to recipients aged 55 years and over who have been on payments for nine or more continuous months.

While I do support the coalition's policy to increase the earning threshold to $300 a fortnight before the rate of income support is impacted, I will not be supporting the second reading amendment put forward by the member for Deakin, as it calls for the scrapping of the $40 increase. Yes, a job is the best way to improve the living standards of individuals and their families, but I'd say it's a little hard to look for a job if you're starving, cold or can't afford transport. In my view, $40 a fortnight, while a step in the right direction, is not enough and falls short of the coalition's increase of $50 a fortnight in 2021. Whilst I note the government has a fine line to walk between addressing the cost-of-living challenges and addressing inflation, I don't believe that providing this minimal increase to income support, which still falls chronically below the poverty line, is the right approach, nor is it living Labor's own values, particularly as they've promised time and again not to leave any Australian behind.

I'm acutely aware of the struggles facing the many in my community of northern Tasmania who are struggling to make ends meet as they choose between paying their rent or putting food on the table—or worse, trying to find a place to live. I do acknowledge that these challenges are not confined only to those who receive income support, as I see a rise in working northern Tasmanians who are struggling to afford the basics. When back in my community recently, I caught up with several local charity organisations that are witnessing an unprecedented demand for their services, particularly from households where one or even both parents are working and are still struggling to keep up with rising costs. Stephen Brown from Launceston's City Mission recently told the local media that the demand for fresh food and clothing is at its highest in 10 years and that the charity is seeing up to 25 new clients seeking help each week. Kirsten Ritchie, who runs Strike It Out, which offers food supplies, clothing, sleeping bags and tents to northern Tasmanians in need, said she was seeing 40 new families and individuals a month asking for help. While the organisation originally started as a support service to help the local homeless population, the cost-of-living increases have led to a demand which she has not seen before.

It's so easy to fall into putting anyone on JobSeeker into the 'other' category, and although I've been on income support at several stages in my life, both as a single parent and on what was then known as Newstart, I don't believe that my own views on this matter are formed just from my own lived experience. I want the discourse on how we discuss income support and other social support services to evolve and lead to better outcomes. I was particularly struck by the words of David Cross, the CEO of the Blueprint Institute. When discussing their report on productivity, he said:

Too many in mainstream parties of government have become numb to the existence of a permanent underclass in Australia.

While I do accept that there is a portion of society that is not looking to engage in work, this is an incredibly small minority of jobseekers. In my time as the federal member for Bass, 99 per cent of individuals I've engaged with who are unemployed want to work. Like many communities across Australia, we're dealing with a high number of job vacancies but not with suitable people to fill them, demonstrating a clear gap.

There are a number of government funded organisations and programs that exist to assist someone to obtain a job, but when we talk about making someone job ready, what does this really mean? For a start, we need to be building up jobseekers, particularly the long-term unemployed, to be ready beyond having the necessary skills to fulfil a job. There must be a commitment to looking at what other barriers may exist that stand in the way of somebody looking for, accepting or staying in a job.

As I've said previously, we can't be expected to fix every challenge faced by an individual when they are looking for work. But when the majority of our population who need and want employment are bumping into one or more roadblocks, I believe that as parliamentarians we have a responsibility to work together to address some of the broader issues. Accessibility around transport as well as mobile phone and internet issues are major challenges, as is child care, for parents, in both single and two-parent families. And I will keep pushing for more reform around trauma informed policies to assist jobseekers, particularly where there may be intergenerational unemployment and poverty. Having more Australians engaged in meaningful employment is a long-term win for the future of our country. But it can't be done by continuing the status quo in how governments interact with jobseekers or with disadvantaged individuals or communities. To again quote David Cross, 'equality of opportunity is critical to boosting productivity and is one of the foundations of classic liberalism'.

I also wholeheartedly support the proposal to expand the parenting payment to single principal carers whose youngest child is aged under 14 years—up from eight years—a reversal in policy from the Gillard era. While this applies to single parents of any gender, we of course know that statistically single parents are overwhelmingly women, and it is women who are disproportionately represented when we look at poverty statistics, particularly later in life, when single women over 60 are the households that are most likely to live in poverty. I agree with the member for Mayo that there is a need to provide support for women as they look to re-enter the workforce after caring for children. It can be incredibly daunting to look for and gain a job if a woman has spent considerable time out of paid work. So, further work is needed to assist with the transition.

I also believe that if governments can meaningfully engage with parents who are interacting with government services from before a child is born there is a greater chance of creating a healthy future for both the child and the parent that will deliver long-term social and economic benefits to society. This is a view shared by Tasmania's Bernadette Black AM, founder of the BRAVE Foundation, a not-for-profit that equips pregnant and parenting young people with resources, referrals and educational opportunities to facilitate happy, healthy and skilled families over time. Bernadette founded the organisation after becoming a mother at 16 years of age and identifying the lack of support available for teenage parents. Just over 30 years later, Bernadette is spearheading a new section of the foundation, the Social Economic Empowerment Division, or SEED. With an initial focus on expecting and parenting young people, SEED is starting with a blueprint for system navigation for young parents in the short term, with an end goal of wider systemic reform for all parents who engage with necessary government services, creating a one-door place-based location that connects parents to support payments, wellbeing and safety and, importantly, their dreams and aspirations. Bernadette says: 'I remain convinced that the opportunity to flourish is a human right, and as a society we shepherd the environment and conditions that make that happen for families. I know our future depends on families flourishing—all families—regardless of background, age, state, demographic or race. We need healthy, thriving families to live in a safe, healthy and free nation if we can truly call ourselves "the lucky country".'

It's people like Bernadette and policy ideas like those that are being explored through SEED that I believe will play a role in moving the dial on some of the long-term issues we face with poverty, unemployment and trauma in communities across Australia, including in northern Tasmania. I acknowledge that the government is endeavouring to take steps in the right direction, but there is much more to do. I look forward to further discussions on the role governments can play in creating a true safety net for Australians in need.

See this speech in context