Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the consideration-in-detail amendments moved by the member for Goldstein. I think it's really important we acknowledge that there is some merit in this program. I want to say to the minister: I know that there have been people across the sector calling on the federal government for a program exactly like this for a period of time. I also want to acknowledge that I do believe there are people who will benefit from this program. I think the issue here is that, as a parliament, we have no line of sight of who those people will be, except for some very limited commentary in an explanatory memorandum committing it to be targeted specifically to low- and middle-income families.

I understand that the federal government is working in the very complicated environment that is our federated system, but I can't help but think there is something slightly off kilter. We are entering into this saying we can't decide what we're going to do until we've consulted with the states and territories, but the first step in consultation should always be in this House. As the legislation stands, we're being asked, as a parliament, to basically trust that the government will make sure this is allocated in a way which would be in keeping with our expectations. Trust is a very valuable asset. It's something that's earned, not necessarily given straightaway. At the moment, the details are just not in this piece of legislation, and this amendment would go some way to tightening those details up.

Question negatived.

See this speech in context