Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Mitchell on a splendid maiden speech which managed to combine a robust expression of political philosophy and a hymn of praise to his splendid electorate. I cannot help but recall Alex Hawke’s statement of some years ago that ‘you don’t join the Liberal Party to be left wing’. It is good to see that he has not lost his gift for pithy expression in the translation to this House.

The bill that we are now debating, the Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008, is an important but uncontroversial bill. It implements an election commitment of the former government, which in a slightly modified form was adopted by the former opposition as part of its ‘me too’ policy. The bill in question increases the utilities allowance for pensioners to $500 a year. It extends the utilities allowance to other beneficiaries of pensionable age and extends it further to disability support pensioners and people on carers payments of any age. It also increases the seniors concession allowance to $500 a person and it increases the telephone allowance for pensioners, carers and disability support pensioners with an internet connection. These are laudable objectives. These are worthwhile benefits. They will help some three million people at a cost of some $4 billion over the forward estimates period. So, obviously, the opposition supports these measures and I congratulate the government for moving so swiftly to bring these benefits to people who need them.

I will make a few observations. We can only afford to pay these increased allowances because our economy is strong and has generated a very strong revenue base. I think the former government deserves considerable credit for that. The fact that the former opposition repeatedly stated before the election that there was not a sliver of difference between the then government and the then opposition on economic policy is perhaps the finest tribute there can be to the economic work of the former government and, in particular, the good work of the member for Higgins. I hope that the new government does nothing to jeopardise that economy and to put at risk the revenue base which makes these kinds of payments affordable.

I should also point out that these latest improvements adopted from the policy of the former government are in keeping with the former government’s record of generosity towards pensioners. I remind the House that it was the former government that increased pensions to 25 per cent of average weekly earnings. It was also the former government which shared the benefits of our prosperity more equally than has perhaps ever been the case in a period of sustained economic boom. It is often said by members opposite that under the former government the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. This was not the case: the rich got richer—sure—but the poor got considerably richer too. In fact, work by the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, based here in Canberra, shows basically that the top and the bottom deciles of income in our society—the millionaires and the merchant bankers on the one hand and the pensioners on the other hand—all went up by approximately the same high percentage over the life of the Howard government. Those whose positions improved most were low- and middle-income earners with children, which is as it should be under a government which wants to do the right thing by the battlers of our country.

I shall conclude by raising two queries for the new government. I note that this particular election commitment was accompanied by an additional commitment to provide pensioners and other beneficiaries with reciprocal concession entitlements in every state. In other words, if I have a concession entitlement as a pensioner in New South Wales and I find myself on a bus in Melbourne, I should get the same discount, the same benefit, as a pensioner there. I note that the former government was heavily criticised for making a similar commitment some years ago but being unable to negotiate this with the states. While I know that the new government made a $50 million election commitment to fund this national pensioner concession entitlement, I do not underestimate for a second the difficulty of negotiating with the states. I think it would assist the House—and I am sure it would interest pensioners and other beneficiaries around the country—if members opposite, in debating this bill, could let us know what the state is of the new government’s negotiations with the states to try to bring about this laudable objective.

The final point I make is that in estimates yesterday the relevant minister, Senator Sherry, neither confirmed nor denied a question about whether the government was planning, as part of the budget process and the cuts which the minister for revenue is vociferously promising us, to limit pensioner entitlements to the utilities allowance and to the seniors concession allowance. I think it would put to rest the potential anxieties of the three million people who stand to benefit from the bill we are now debating if the government was able to assure them that it was not giving now only to take away in the budget. I think it was a remarkable answer from Senator Sherry to simply say on something as important as this, ‘I cannot confirm or deny the matter raised.’ Surely it would not have hurt him or the government to say there are absolutely no plans to cut, reduce or in any way limit these particular benefits, and I call on members opposite to supply those words, the words that Senator Sherry was unable to supply in estimates yesterday.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note that the member for Warringah has the opportunity to ask those questions directly of the minister during consideration in detail, and I assume he will take up that opportunity. I rise to speak on the Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008, which follows through on one of Labor’s key election promises. This amendment will offer older Australians, veterans, people with disabilities and carers further assistance towards making ends meet. This amendment will provide an increase in the utilities allowance from $107.20 per year to $500 per year, to be paid quarterly with payments made in March, June, September and December. This amendment will also extend the utilities allowance to include people who receive the disability support pension and carers, as well as those who receive the widow B pension, wife pension and bereavement allowance. The seniors concession allowance will increase from $218 per year to $500 per year, also to be paid quarterly. Also included in this bill is an increase in telephone allowances from $88 per year to $132 per year paid to veterans, income support recipients of age pension, senior health card holders and also those who receive carer payment or disability support pension. This increased payment is specifically for those who have an internet connection and recognises that cost.

I am very pleased to be standing before the House to add my support for this bill, which delivers one of Labor’s key election promises. I know how important these additional payments are and how much they will ease the financial burden of those in our community who are eligible. In my electorate, around 28,000 people will benefit from this bill. These are people who struggle every day to make ends meet. These are people who have worked hard all of their lives to make this country a great nation. They are veterans who have sacrificed years of their lives and who have risked or experienced being imprisoned in enemy territory, incurring disability or injury in the defence of this great country and often risking death for our country. These are partners of those veterans who have raised families on their own and who stepped into farming and industry to keep the country going whilst their loved ones were away fighting for us. These are people who experience disability in their lives and who face challenges that few of us sitting here in this House can ever imagine. These are people who spend their lives caring for others, often under difficult circumstances. The increased allowances acknowledge the day-to-day struggle of people on low fixed incomes to make ends meet.

The issue of trying to make ends meet has been expressed to me over and over again by my constituents ever since I became the federal member for Ballarat in 2001. Time and time again, I hear of the experiences of those who find it harder and harder to pay their bills. These stories come to me through my office, through emails, in person at my mobile office or at stalls at the local Trash and Trivia. Everywhere I go people are telling me that the cost of living is increasing and that it is becoming increasingly difficult to make ends meet. This is even more so for those people who are on fixed limited incomes. Their stories turned into a tidal wave in 2007, when I was lucky enough to travel this great country in my capacity as Chair of Labor’s Family Watch Task Force. I spoke to thousands of Australians in shopping centres, markets and street stalls all over this country and I take this opportunity to thank all of those families for sharing their very personal stories with me. I am very proud that this government is committed to trying to assist working families.

Whilst this task force focused on families, I could not help but consider and listen to how the themes of high cost of living and difficulties in making ends meet impact on veterans, age pensioners, disability pensioners and carers. Some of these people, through no fault of their own, are unable to access the job market at all. An overwhelming number of constituents made this point during the election campaign, taking the initiative to telephone or call into my office to ask what Labor would be doing for those who live on pensions or benefits. It was particularly gratifying when we released Labor’s Making Ends Meet plan for older Australians, people with disabilities and carers during the election campaign, and the feedback that I received on that policy from the people whom it would directly assist confirmed this for me. My office received an overwhelming number of requests for this policy and then received a great response from those it would help the most. It was touching to hear the people of my electorate tell me that this would ease the burden for them, that it would help take the pressure off and that it would relieve the financial stress being experienced and, of course, the emotional toll that goes with it. This, along with our other election commitments, does help those who need it the most.

As I stated previously, the cost of living is an issue for everyone but more so for those who are on low fixed incomes. The cost of housing, the cost of groceries, the cost of petrol and the cost of utilities are real concerns for the vast number of Australians, and I hear in question time that it has suddenly become a concern to the opposition—finally! Labor knows all too well the difficulties inherent in trying to make ends meet, because Labor went out and listened and then moved into action to develop a suite of initiatives to help the Australian community out. Labor has already announced an inquiry into grocery prices to ensure that Australians are not paying more than they should be at the supermarket. The inquiry will look at all facets of the grocery industry, from supply right through the chain to retail level. The report will be presented to the Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs by 31 July and will then be scrutinised to ensure that the Australian community are getting a fair deal with their weekly grocery bill—something that has a direct impact on those on fixed incomes.

The ACCC has also been asked to provide advice on how to establish a dedicated website that focuses on grocery prices as well as how they can deliver a periodic survey of grocery prices in supermarkets. This will help all citizens, but particularly those who find it difficult to physically shop around due to disabilities or caring commitments. These are real measures that will help people, but particularly those on fixed incomes.

I am sure my colleagues would also agree with me that one of the major strains on the family budget is the cost of petrol. It is also one of the most frustrating issues for constituents, who constantly question why there is such a huge fluctuation in price, often unexplained. One very positive and responsible thing that the government can do is to ensure that we have a fully competitive fuel market in Australia. The appointment of Mr Pat Walker as the government’s nominee for petrol commissioner shows the public that the Rudd Labor government is serious about a fair go at the petrol bowser and will not tolerate unfair pricing or advantage flowing through, to the detriment of the Australian community.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Ciobo interjecting

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note the member for Moncrieff again at the table interjecting. The opposition showed no interest whatsoever in these issues. In fact, when I tabled the Family Watch report, which clearly showed how concerned families in Australia were about grocery and petrol prices, the then government ridiculed it—‘That’s not an issue, not a problem at all.’ Families in fact have never been better off, we were told. So I would like to hear what the opposition proposes to do.

In the 11 years of the Howard government the average home rose in cost from four times the average wage to seven times the average wage. A three-bedroom rental has risen by 82 per cent whilst vacancy rates have been slashed in half. This is the legacy of the Howard government, which chose to ignore this crisis. The crisis that has escalated over a decade cannot be fixed overnight, but we must begin the process of alleviating this crisis right now. Labor has done this by developing policies implementing a First Home Saver Account, a Housing Affordability Fund, a National Rental Affordability Scheme and a better approach to land release. This will begin immediately to relieve the strain on those who have up until now believed that homeownership was a pipe dream.

As well as the Rudd Labor government taking action on the cost of groceries, petrol and housing, the bill that we are debating today will take the action necessary to provide assistance to 2.7 million Australians who are doing it tough.

I am especially pleased to lend my support to increasing the rate of telephone allowance from $88 a year to $132 a year, specifically for those who have an internet connection. Whilst this increase will be meaningful financially, it is also meaningful in terms of what it actually signifies for people. Extending this payment to recipients of disability pension and carer payments is a natural extension of this allowance. It acknowledges the benefits of internet use and the growing use of this technology amongst older people and people with disabilities and carers. For people with disabilities the internet can be a link to a world that may not be able to be accessed any other way. For those in the community with mobility issues the internet can be used as a way of dealing with day-to-day activities that can prove challenging—ordering groceries, online shopping and keeping in contact with loved ones. For those of us who have communication or anxiety issues the internet can be a safe form of connecting with others. Disability specific chat rooms have flourished, and this shows how accessible these sites are for those who are unable, for various reasons, to link into face-to-face support or social groups.

The internet is also a powerful learning tool, giving many people access to a world that may not be able to be accessed any other way. It is no longer impossible to have a significant and important relationship with someone who shares the same challenges, interests or hobbies who may live halfway around the world. For carers it can be a connection to others who may be experiencing the same challenges or a link to a crisis service when it is needed the most. It can be a way of keeping in touch with friends when it may be impossible to get out of the house. It can be an instant connection to someone when you feel that you are all alone. It can be a way to relax when the opportunity to go out may not be available. With families often scattered across the country, older citizens can now keep in touch with their children and grandchildren. I must admit that I took great delight when I met with a very young 88-year-old who was communicating with her grandchildren in America for the very first time via the internet in one of my local community internet places, which was a wonderful thing to see.

With increasing technological sophistication, and a soon to be much improved broadband network, grandparents can send and receive photographs, video footage and emails from their loved ones, their children and their grandchildren. This increase in telephone allowance for the purpose of assisting with the costs of an internet connection sends the message loud and clear that Labor is about keeping families connected to each other and keeping everyone connected to the community. It provides real assistance to those who need it the most. It acknowledges the modern world that we live in, recognises the modern challenges and provides a modern approach to meeting those challenges.

Those in our community who receive a disability support pension, carer payment, wife pension, widow B pension or bereavement allowance, and those in our community who are under qualifying age and receiving a service pension or income support supplement, will for the first time, under this legislation, be entitled to a utilities allowance. This is long overdue. Labor recognises that these groups in our society are doing it tough and are entitled to some additional assistance. Labor recognises that the additional allowance—increased from $107.20 to $500—is also long overdue. These community members have been most patient as they have watched the cost of petrol skyrocket, the weekly groceries bills add up and the costs of gas and electricity continue to climb. This is the legacy of the previous government, which was obviously deaf to the calls from those on low fixed incomes and their advocates that budgets were strained to breaking point. Labor did not dismiss those calls. We listened carefully and then we got moving. We heard that quarterly bills added a great deal of stress at that time in many households, which is why the increased utilities allowance will be paid quarterly—at the time that bills are due. That just makes sense.

This amending bill also increases the annual rate of seniors concession allowance from $208 to $500 for all eligible self-funded retirees. The original concession allowance was introduced in December 2004 and has, to date, been paid twice a year. This bill ensures that seniors concession allowance is paid quarterly, along with the utilities allowance. This timing of the allowances will provide the maximum benefit for this payment, alleviating the difficulties of finding the money to pay the bills that all seem to arrive at once.

One of the things I would like to talk about within the context of this bill is the government’s plan to develop a new way of indexing the pension. This government intends to introduce legislation later this year that will change the way pensions are indexed, providing for a real formula that is based on the real prices that consumers are exposed to. The formula will take a basket of goods that reflects what pensioners actually buy—meaning more emphasis on utilities and food and less emphasis on whitegoods—and add this as a new element to the indexation formula. The end result will mean that the age pension will increase according to the basket of goods, the overall CPI or 25 per cent of male average earnings. Whichever is the highest will determine the new pension rate. This is another election promise that Labor is preparing to deliver.

The speed with which Labor has got to work shows our commitment to those who are often silenced through their circumstances. These are the people that Labor has traditionally supported and, now in government, we are continuing that tradition—those on low or fixed incomes who continue to contribute to society despite the challenges that life has presented to them, those who provide the caring that makes our country a richer place, those who were willing to sacrifice their lives for our freedom, veterans and those who have worked hard all their lives and who now care for grandchildren or devote their time to volunteer activities in our communities. I am very pleased to stand here today, on behalf of all those people in my electorate who will benefit from these changes, and commend the bill to the House.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened to the previous speaker, the member for Ballarat, with a good deal of interest because, as she spoke, anyone who was listening and did not have a knowledge of the background of this bill, the Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008, would have thought that it contained original thought—that the Labor Party had managed to have an original thought that it put forward as policy as we went forward to the last election. But, to those people who are aware, this was one of those policies known as Labor’s ‘me too’ policy. It was a policy announced by the then coalition government on 23 October 2007 entitled ‘More Support for Pensioners, Self-Funded Retirees, People with Disabilities and their Carers’, only to be followed on 1 November 2007 by the Labor Party’s release of their policy called ‘Making Ends Meet: Federal Labor’s Plan for Older Australians, People with Disabilities and Carers’. So the bill has its origin in coalition policy. Indeed, it has antecedents. The policy was first developed for the 2006-07 budget when the coalition provided a bonus payment equal to the annual amount of utilities allowance for each person of age pension age eligible for that allowance. It was extended to other groups of older Australians who were recipients of the mature age allowance, partner allowance and widow allowance, and they also received the bonus. In the budget for 2007-08, the coalition provided a one-off pension seniors bonus payment of $500 to everyone of age or service pension eligibility for the utilities allowance or the seniors concession allowance. That was finally developed into the policy of 23 October 2007 which I mentioned previously and which is the antecedent of the legislation that is now before us. In other words, the very simple proposition I am putting is that, if the opposition—or, rather, the opposition as we now are—had not put forward this proposition when it was in government, this legislation would not be before the House because it was, as I said before, one of the ‘me too’ policies which Labor adopted.

In proposing this utilities payment, it should be acknowledged that the coalition developed this policy within the framework of recognising the worth of individuals, not the collective that the government will continue to apply. We recognised that individuals needed assistance with their utilities payments as they came around, just as we had recognised this in our very much earlier policy when we said the CPI was not a sufficient index for the age pension and, indeed, for service pensions because veterans’ entitlements to these utilities and concession allowances are a fundamental focus of our policy and the ‘me too’ bill that we see. The policy that we introduced to change the indexing of age pension and service pensions from CPI to MTAWE—male total average weekly earnings—was simply to recognise that older Australians who had given enormous service and sacrifice in bringing up families and contributing to the wealth of the nation were not being properly rewarded for what they had done by the utilisation of the CPI, which of course had been Labor policy for 13 years prior to that. So we made that promise and, on coming into government in 1996, we in fact honoured that promise. And MTAWE became the index that increases were measured by. When we came into office and we started to see the growth of wages again—which of course they had not done under Hawke and Keating when the policies that they had introduced suppressed wages—we saw a need to ensure that pensioners were not left behind. It was this concern for the individual person who had made a contribution, not the collective—that group over there, and the individual can be sacrificed to the group—which prompted that change in policy.

The bill that is before us enables an increased utilities allowance of $500 to be paid to people receiving the age pension, mature age allowance, partner allowance, widow allowance, service pension, veterans income support supplement, carer payment, disability support pension and DVA invalidity service pension; to holders of the Commonwealth seniors health card; and to pensioners, carers and people with disabilities. These people will receive $500 per person or couple. It will also be paid to self-funded retirees, who are eligible for $500 each. This legislation was born of the concern and recognition that a great number of people had a need for this increase.

It is very important that our policy, which this bill reflects, was to increase the utilities allowance payment and extend it to disability pensioners, particularly, who had created quite a voice for themselves so that they would be heard. The then government, the now opposition, recognised that voice and the fairness of what they had to say and extended this to them. As I said previously, the then opposition and now government ‘me too’d’ that policy.

I was also pleased to see that this bill fulfils the Labor Party policy to increase the telephone allowance for older Australians, carers and people with disabilities from $88 to $132, provided they are eligible to receive income support and have an internet connection at home. This also applies to veterans and their dependants, provided they too have an internet connection at home. This is recognition of the fact that the fastest growing group of people in the community who are taking up use of the internet is the over-55s group. Very early in the piece, when I first took over as Minister for Aged Care back in 1998, the over-55s made very low use of the internet and now, as I said, they have become the fastest growing users of the internet within our community. So it is pleasing to see that that has been delivered upon.

The third thing that Labor promised was, again, a take-up of an earlier coalition policy, which was to negotiate with the states to have the states give reciprocity for travel concession. This is one of the real contentious issues that older Australians have had for many years. In 2001 we, as the then government, made a commitment to undertake to negotiate with the state governments to see that recognition take place. The Labor Party has said that, because all governments in Australia are now Labor, it will be able to negotiate an outcome which other people could not negotiate. It is true to say that the state governments would not sign on to the agreement—for whatever reason they had, they refused to sign on. Although the money was put forward by the federal government to compensate the state governments for the cost that they would have, it did not happen.

In the papers that it put forward to be costed prior to the election, the Labor Party put forward $50 million to compensate state governments over four years for the cost of negotiating these reciprocity arrangements. There is not one word about that in this bill—not a syllable. It was with great fanfare that the Prime Minister, as he now is, announced the policy back then on 1 November 2007. He even put his picture on the press release, ‘Making ends meet—national travel concessions for older Australians’, in which he said:

For example, a bus driver in New South Wales will be able to apply the standard concession when an older Australian presents a valid State Government Seniors Card even if it is from another State or Territory.

This will include long distance rail travel on routes like the Indian Pacific, the Ghan and the Overland.

Reciprocal transport concessions will help older Australians who like to travel to visit their grandchildren and see the country.

Federal Labor will end the buck-passing between the States and the Commonwealth.

He also said:

That’s because all governments in the country are now Labor and they will be easily able to discuss these things and implement them because they are all Labor.

And yet we get this bill before the House today, brought in early—and I commend that because it is important that the utilities allowance and concession payments be made, even though the indexation date has been postponed by the legislation from 20 March to 20 September. It shows that there is no movement at all on this important issue of the transport concessional card. I repeat that a big fanfare was made by the government saying that they would be able to achieve outcomes because they could all talk with one voice. And yet there is not a word; there is nothing in this bill about it and nothing to explain why it is not being dealt with. It is simply a bill to bring in what is basically legislation to enact a previous government’s commitment, the now opposition’s policy.

I listened with interest to the debates in the House today, particularly during the MPI, about the way in which the government are going to deliver on other promises. The first one they made was that they would bring down interest rates. Since they have been in government, interest rates have gone up. They said they would bring down grocery prices. They have appointed a commissioner to oversight them. They said they would bring down petrol prices. Petrol prices have gone up, as indeed have grocery prices. So the three big issues for which they made promises—reduce interest rates, reduce grocery prices and reduce petrol prices—have failed, failed and failed. What is their policy to deal with this inflationary pressure, the effects of which these utility allowances are meant to meet some of the payments for? It is very simply this: they are restoring all the power of the trade union movement that had diminished in the last 11½ years—restoring that power to the unions so they will again become a monopoly player. The impact of that is to be inflationary. There is only one tool that the government has to use, and that is trying to force people out of jobs to increase the size of the unemployment pool so that pressure can be taken off inflation.

The government can use all the weasel words that they want, but at the end of the day what Treasurer Swan is saying to the Australian people is, ‘You can’t have the full employment that the coalition government gave you and have low inflation.’ Well we did it. We said: ‘When the economy is booming and when there are surpluses and we’ve gathered in too much money’—we do not need that amount of money to deliver the things that are needed for people—‘we will give it back to you, the people. We will give you back your money.’ So people felt that when prices were rising and they got a tax cut, they had some more money in their pockets. This brought back the pressure to stop pushing for higher wages, which in turn brought back the pressure to start pushing higher prices to pay for the higher wages. In addition to that, it stopped the money remaining in government hands. Governments, no matter of which persuasion, like to spend the money they have in their hands. So, if we had not had that tax cut policy, we would have had the triple whammy: we would have had a government with the money still to spend, we would have had people pushing for an increase in wages and we would have had employers pushing for an increase in prices to pay for the increased wages. We would have gone up exactly the same way and down the other side, as we did under Paul Keating with the ‘recession we had to have’.

Treasurer Swan stood here today and he said, ‘This is the highest inflation we’ve had’—four per cent I think we are talking about—‘for 16 years.’ You bet. What happened 16 years ago? We were coming off the back of the worst recession that we had had, engineered by Paul Keating. And what did we have? What was the result of that? It was one million people unemployed. When you have one million people unemployed, of course inflation will come down. And that is the blunt tool that this government is using. It can talk about the Reserve Bank and it can talk about its planned cuts in expenditure from the budget, but everybody knows that, because of the strength of this economy—the one that it has inherited—there will be in excess of 1.5 per cent of GDP in the surplus without it doing anything at all. But the Australian people have to know: the government is the enemy of full employment. It is the enemy of full employment because it is handing back the monopoly power to the trade unions to push for wage increases. And that has begun already—you hear the voice of the head of the CFMEU; you see the strikes that are starting already. So when we see a bill like this being implemented in legislation today, which is bringing in a coalition policy that was designed to make sure that individuals who are older are able to participate in the growth of the economy, we see this measure as a ‘me too’ bill. What we are really seeing are the hardships those people are going to suffer because of the policies that this government is going to implement. Gone are the restraints, full-on will be the pressure.

The opposition will be supporting this bill. We are pleased to see a policy that we promised being implemented, even if we are unable to do it ourselves—but we are able to support it. We are pleased to see the $58 increase to recognise the importance of the internet—that is per year, I might add. We are disappointed that we have seen no progress talked about at all on the question of travel concession cards, and we are very disappointed to see that we seem to have a government that is hell-bent on dismantling the economy, which was in a strong condition when it inherited it. This will be to the disadvantage of ordinary individual Australians but will be to the huge benefit of the collectivist union movement.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Congratulations on your re-election to this parliament, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker Sidebottom, and your election to the Speakers Panel. I know that you will shed your wisdom upon this House in that position and I look forward to speaking in the parliament with you in the chair.

The contribution by the previous speaker was quite interesting. Yes, this side of parliament are about the collective good. We care about all pensioners, all senior citizens, all veterans, all people on disability pensions and all carers. We are not about the individual; we are not about our mates, as the previous government was. One thing that was a trademark of the Howard government was the fact that it always cared about the individual as long as they were its mates. This legislation is not about the mates of the Howard government; it is about those people who look to the government for support.

The other issue that the honourable member for Mackellar raised was transport concessions and reciprocity with the states. I have to put on the record that the Howard government could never get agreement from the states. Why? Because they were locked in the blame game, they were not serious about it. All they wanted to do was have a go at the states. They would say, ‘We’ll commit this money’ and know that there was absolutely no way that they were ever going to deliver because they were too busy blaming the states for every problem that they had. I think the member for Mackellar really needs to make sure that she remembers facts as they were. As far as the Rudd government is concerned, we have made a commitment of $50 million to introduce a national seniors’ transport concession scheme for senior card holders, and that will be introduced by January 2009. The Rudd government delivers on its commitments. The Rudd government is not a government of core and non-core promises, as was the Howard government. It is a government that is very mindful of the seniors, the veterans and all of those people the Howard government made an art of doing over each and every time it introduced legislation into this parliament.

The Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008 delivers on a Rudd election commitment. It delivers advantages to a large number of people throughout Australia. The Shortland electorate is the 10th oldest electorate in the whole of Australia and, as of the 2006 census, it has the 10th highest proportion of people over the age of 65. I know that over a very long period of time those people have been finding it very hard to survive under the mean-spirited Howard government that was previously on the government benches in this House. That is why this legislation will benefit the people that I represent so much. This bill increases the annual rate of the utilities allowance from $107.20 to $500 per household and provides for the allowance to be paid in $125 quarterly instalments rather than biannually. What does that mean? It means that pensioners, seniors and carers will be better able to manage their budgets. Bills for utilities actually come in quarterly, so people will not have to wait for those biannual payments to be able to pay their bills or manage their finances. The allowances are locked into the time that the bills come in. This bill extends, for the first time, the qualifications for the utilities allowance to people who are under pension age and receive a disability support pension, carer payment, wife pension, widow B pension or bereavement allowance and to people who are under the qualifying age and receive a service pension or income support supplement. I would like to concentrate on that for a little bit.

The Howard government constantly refused to acknowledge the needs of these people. Every time the Howard government introduced measures for things like one-off payments and the utilities allowance to people on disability support pensions, my office was swamped with people who were in receipt of the disability support pension and were missing out. They felt very much that they were second-class citizens. They felt that the Howard government was discriminating against them. They would tell me that they had very high needs. Quite often a person who is on a disability support pension will have to pay much higher pharmacy bills because they require pharmaceuticals to assist them in their daily lives. They have a number of extraordinary costs, as do pensioners, but the Howard government refused to acknowledge the needs of these people.

When I stood up in this parliament last year and spoke about the then government’s one-off payments and I brought this to the attention of then Minister Brough—a member who is no longer in this parliament—he stood up in this parliament and said, ‘People with disabilities have never been better off than they are under the Howard government and any problems they are having have been caused by the states.’ Isn’t that the blame game at its extreme? Firstly, he was arrogantly denying and not recognising the problems that people with disabilities have, blaming them, to a degree, for the fact that they have a disability; secondly, he was passing the blame onto the states and saying, ‘We are doing the right things; it is all the states’ fault.’ I feel that the people of Australia actually recognised the then minister’s treatment of people appropriately, and he is no longer in this House.

Under this legislation, the seniors concession allowance will increase from $218 to $500, the same as it is for pensioners. They are being brought into line. Previously pensioners were receiving $107.20 and seniors were receiving $218. So both groups will now receive $500, and I think it is appropriate that pensioners and eligible self-funded retirees should be treated the same.

The bill increases the rate of telephone allowance from $88 to $132 for certain income support recipients who have an internet connection at home. This is something that I think will be welcomed. It is available to pension-age income support recipients and to disability support pensioners—once again recognising that people with disabilities have the same needs as other pensioners—carer payment recipients and self-funded retirees who hold a Commonwealth seniors card. The internet is a very important way for people to communicate with others, and it is becoming more and more important each and every day. If a person is in some way restricted in their mobility—if they have a disability and are confined to their home, or if they are older and frail and cannot get out—the fact that they can use the internet actually brings the world into their home. So I think that this is a very important initiative. I would also like to mention the Australian seniors internet fund. The Rudd government will be establishing a $15 million seniors internet fund to establish free internet kiosks in key community locations such as senior citizens centres and neighbourhood houses Currently only one in five Australians over the age of 65 have access to the internet.

There is a very active seniors group in my electorate, at Lake Munmorah, who have developed a very popular computer club. They are constantly seeking funds to expand it because there is such demand for the internet within that area and a number of them are unable to have computers in their home. This, to me, is an example of how the Rudd Labor government’s legislation will benefit constituents in the Shortland electorate.

I would like to go through and highlight a couple of issues. Under the Howard government, senior Australians, people whom I represent in this parliament, were really suffering. The cost of living pressure facing older Australians on fixed incomes was increasing each and every day. It was only this week that a senior pensioner from Caves Beach in the Shortland electorate contacted my office and welcomed the fact that the grocery price inquiry was taking place. In Swansea there is only one supermarket and the prices there have increased by 20 per cent. She went along and spoke to the supermarket manager and was told: ‘Bad luck if you don’t like it. We are the only supermarket here; you’ve got to lump it.’

I think it is very important that we acknowledge the fact that the Rudd government are listening to the needs of people. We are actually recognising the fact that pensioners, seniors and veterans—the veterans who have fought for Australia—are doing it hard. They have done it really, really hard. It is because of that that we have made these changes. It is because of that that the transport concessions will be introduced. It is because of that that we are having the inquiry into grocery prices, and it is because of that that a petrol commissioner has been appointed.

These issues have not arisen since the election; these issues have been on the table for a very long time. And these are issues that the Howard government constantly ignored. This legislation shows the different approach of the Rudd Labor government—a government that listens to and acknowledges what seniors have contributed to Australia in the past, acknowledges the fact that people with disabilities have the right to be treated in the same way as other people and acknowledges the fact that cost of living pressures make it very hard for those people.

As I have already mentioned, this legislation delivers on key election commitments. There are no core and non-core promises. The Prime Minister has said that he will deliver on all the commitments he has made to the Australian people, and this is one of those commitments. The government has committed over $4.1 billion to deliver a plan to help make ends meet for seniors. There is a $3.7 billion utilities allowance increase. That is an increase of $500 a year for recipients. It has also been extended to recipients who were not previously entitled to it. The telephone allowance increase will have an impact on access to the internet. Once again, that is a very good initiative.

The other initiative that I think is very important is that the government is developing a new index for pensions—a basket full of goods that more accurately reflects the goods and services that a pensioner buys. There is more weighting on food and utilities and less on whitegoods. I have pensioners talking to me constantly about how the increase in grocery prices is impacting on them. They have highlighted the increase in fruit, vegetables and meat prices in particular and have indicated that quite often they are unable to afford those items. They have brought to my attention that not only are prices going up but also, while some prices may remain the same, the actual content in the package has decreased. They say a new way of looking at how the index is developed is long overdue. Once developed, this will be added as an extra element in the indexing formula so that the age pension will increase by the new pensioners basket, the overall CPI or 25 per cent of male average weekly earnings, whichever is higher. In other words, we recognise that we need to revisit this.

This is welcome legislation. It is something that the previous Howard government could have fixed, but they just ignored the needs of pensioners. They denied the fact that pensioners were doing it hard. As the then Prime Minister said, ‘Australians have never been better off than they are under the Howard government.’ I am very proud to be able to stand in this parliament today to support this legislation. It is legislation that is delivering on the Rudd government’s commitment to the Australian people at the last election. I know that I will be standing in this parliament time and time again talking on legislation that is delivering on commitments to the Australian people, because the Rudd Labor government is about delivering. The Rudd Labor government is not about weasel words; it is not about moving away from the commitments it has made. It is not about core and non-core promises. It is about delivering to the Australian people. I support the legislation before us in the House today.

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008, which addresses the utilities allowance, the seniors concession allowance, the telephone allowance and a number of changes that the previous member mentioned in relation to the indexation processes. These measures will benefit a large number of people and are obviously intended to do so. In my electorate of New England, the issue of the age pension is one that is raised in my office and the public arena quite often. Only in recent days, the Northern Daily Leader, the major daily paper that comes out of Tamworth, ran a series of stories on old age pensioners and how they are struggling to make ends meet.

I have made the point before, and I would like to take the opportunity with this legislation to raise the issue once again, that a nation which in recent years has been able to establish massive surpluses in terms of budgetary processes should be able to give a bit more back, even more than this particular package, to those who are of the generation that created the circumstances out of which those surpluses are now being generated. If we reflect on that group of people, we realise that they are mostly people who were not involved in superannuation schemes as people younger than them would be. There is greater opportunity these days to have some participation in superannuation arrangements and hence do a bit more for one’s own retirement. But a lot of the people who are struggling now—and a lot of members have spoken about these people—are of a generation that did not have that opportunity. In some circumstances they did not have the expectations that younger people of today would have in terms of their spending power and the activities that they derive from the economy.

I would suggest to the government that, if there are going to be surplus budgets in future, our older people should benefit. Our older people—our pensioners and our veterans, and I know there are self-funded retirees as well—are the ones who created the circumstances for the economy to develop so that we could have surpluses in the budgetary processes. The veterans made many sacrifices to make sure that this land remained a free land and that we can have the democratic processes that we enjoy today. This bill encapsulates two groups who have made an enormous contribution to the society in which we live today. In my view, neither group is recognised to the extent that it should be. As I have said, if there are surpluses available, these are the first people that we should look to—not in some sort of vote-buying exercise but in an attempt to equalise the playing field so that, as members, we do not constantly hear of some of the hardships that pensioners are going through in their daily lives.

The other issue I would like to raise is directly in relation to veterans of the Second World War. We still have an absurd situation where veterans who gave up their time to serve Australia in the Second World War but do not have what is called ‘qualifying service’, which means having an angry shot fired at them in combat, still do not receive gold card health benefits. They are dying at the rate of 1,200 a month, and most of those people are well into their 80s. Particularly given the economic circumstances where there have been surpluses derived, I would have thought that, given their age, these people should be treated exactly the same as other World War II veterans, irrespective of whether they served overseas but did not have an angry shot fired at them. These people are not going to be with us forever, so it is not a projection of funding for 100 years once the gates have opened.

Many members in this House would have people in their electorates who gave up five years of their lives to serve their country, to be here to defend it while others went overseas. My father went overseas and he would have been a great lot of help if the Japanese had come to Werris Creek! He was in Egypt and it probably would have taken him a while to get home to defend my mother. The people who enlisted and stayed in Australia were available to go wherever they were sent by the government of the day. We are treating those two groups of people very differently. The people who went to Egypt qualified because they went to war. Those who stayed here just hung about. They did not do anything. But in terms of having the capacity and the training to defend the nation if called upon, if the Japanese had advanced through New Guinea and invaded Australia, they were the people who were going to defend our land, not other people’s lands. I call on Prime Minister Rudd to show some compassion for these people. It is time that we overcame this ridiculous notion of qualifying service.

A man in my electorate trained for five years. On a couple of occasions he was going to be sent overseas and then they retrained him to stay here. Then he went into the paratroopers just in case something went wrong. In five years he had a number of accidents out of aircraft and suffered injuries. Now he is in his 80s and is suffering the consequences of those injuries. When he goes into a surgery for a consultation or any medical assistance, he can be with another 85-year-old man who happened to go to Egypt and they will be treated differently by the system. I think that is a disgrace.

In my electorate a man called Ken Colton, who only died last year, had obviously been affected by this notion of qualifying service and felt he was regarded as a second-class soldier. It was not because he was not prepared to go overseas and fight but because the government of the day determined that his unit was to stay here. His unit was to go from Darwin back to wherever to defend the nation in case it was invaded.

I make that plea once again. It has fallen on deaf ears for about six years. As I said, those people are dying at a massive rate. I make the plea that we recognise those who are left and provide those veterans with that little bit of extra help in terms of access to the gold card.

The other issue that the legislation covers is disability. I take the opportunity, with a little bit of licence in relation to the bill, to raise this issue. I am glad the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services is here, because it is an issue that he may well have some regard for. It is the issue of young people with disabilities who are currently housed in nursing homes. It is an issue of quite inappropriate housing—not that I am being critical of nursing homes. There are something like 6,000 young people who are currently housed in nursing homes which are essentially built for old people. A lot of those young people have a lot of life in front of them and really need different resources provided to them. A number of groups in my electorate have been working on a regional model so that services can be delivered to those young people with disabilities.

A few years ago I travelled down to Hobart. I was in Tasmania on committee business, but I took the time to go to look at a model in Hobart called ADARDS. It was not an issue of young people in nursing homes; it was an issue of people with dementia. But the style and the model of the building and the way in which the services were delivered was something that we should all look at. It tailored the resources to the specific needs of the people. In that case they had dementia. In this case there are young people with disabilities that need to be housed in more appropriate circumstances than they are now. I look forward to working with the new parliamentary secretary on this particular issue and other issues in relation to people with disabilities. I have been a member of that voluntary committee within the parliament and have had a number of interests in that particular area. Deputy Speaker Burke, I do congratulate you on your appointment.

One of the things the legislation is trying to do is make it easier for pensioners. There is something that we should look very closely at. I know petrol and grocery pricing is the political flavour of the day, to go across the chamber to what the government are going to do. I wish them well in their attempts. There are going to be a number of difficulties in looking at grocery prices. There are things that the government can do, and that the former government could have done, in terms of petrol pricing. A long time ago I did economics at university. I remember very little of it, and I have never practised in terms of being an economist, so do not denigrate my statements. One thing I do remember is that if a country has a comparative advantage in a trade area it should actually take advantage of it. That applies in a number of areas. In the petroleum field it applies.

We have an absurd situation in this country. I know it was introduced for very good reasons, which were probably lies at the time, but the politicians of the day got away with it. I speak of the excise on fuel. If we really want to do something about fuel, we have the capacity to do something about it: we have a taxation regime. With the excise of 38c a litre plus the GST of 12c or 13c, you are looking at 51c a litre in tax. I know this new fellow that is going to fix up all the bowsers so we will all get cheaper fuel will do a tremendous job, but he will probably have an influence of about 2c. If you are living in the country, with the sales volumes that go through some of the bowsers at petrol stations and other places, that 2c will be more than subsumed in the margins of the operators.

If the government are serious about putting Australia in a position where business activity can have some degree of comparative advantage, let us start looking at the taxation system that we have developed in this nation. I hope I am not verballing the man, but I think Tim Fischer was one person who, when the GST arrangements were being discussed through the late nineties, actually wanted to do something about the inclusion of the excise regime on fuel. I think he was overruled because the mathematics, in terms of the percentage of the GST to recoup the required income, would have meant that the GST may well have been about 13 per cent on sales. The boffins of the day assumed that 10 per cent was as high as you could go without revolt from the people. It just shows how some of our taxation system is derived.

If the government are serious about looking at taxation—and I do not agree with the surplus that is being put back to the people; I think it will be inflationary and the government will pay a penalty for that; but they believe they are doing the right thing—and if they are serious about really taking the lid off taxation and the impacts that taxation has in terms of economic activity, they have to look at fuel taxation as one of those things that particularly impact on country people. It is not so bad in the city, where there is an option of public transport and other things, but in the country it is something that you just cannot get away from. As members of parliament we have our fuel provided by those hardworking taxpayers, so we do not necessarily feel it. But it is something that small business and other people are affected by.

I will now get back to the bill. The other day, the Northern Daily Leader reported a story about a pensioner who had moved to a smaller village because of the lower cost of housing, but they still needed a vehicle to access services because there was no public transport there. This happens a lot in country communities. Obviously, the cost of a vehicle and the cost of fuel have an impact on the way in which people can survive on a pension. Many would say, ‘If you are a pensioner and you can’t afford a car, you shouldn’t have one,’ but in some cases that means a pensioner cannot get to a doctor or to a service. Pensioners cannot afford to pay the price of rental accommodation even in a town like Tamworth, for instance, so they go to the smaller communities where that cost is cheaper.

There are a number of things that the government should do about the old age pension, but probably the most important one in my view is the indexation arrangement. This has been a farce for many years. It has not kept pace with the real cost of living for these people. I make the plea once again, which must be for about the 50th time. There is a new government. The old government was not prepared to have a serious look at this issue. It sort of dummied the pass to the veterans on many occasions—that might be a good election slogan; I must remember it! The veterans of the Second World War, whether they served overseas or stayed in this country to defend the nation from attack, are the very people who created the circumstances where we could have an age pension and a parliamentary system where issues such as this could be debated. It is time that we treated all these veterans the same in terms of their access to healthcare arrangements.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker Burke, may I congratulate you on your election. I would also like to thank the preceding speakers for their contributions—in particular, the member for Ballarat and the member for Shortland, who are tireless campaigners for pensioners and self-funded retirees, and the member for New England for his interest in young people and nursing homes. I also thank him for his kind words. I certainly look forward to working closely with him on those matters and to visiting his electorate to investigate further the places to which he referred.

The Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Allowances) Bill 2008 will give much-needed financial support to about three million eligible Australians, including pensioners and self-funded retirees, who are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet. This bill will amend the social security law, the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 to give increased and more timely financial support to older Australians, people with a disability, carers and veterans.

This bill will help older Australians receiving income support payments such as the age pension and veteran service pension by significantly increasing the utilities allowance. This measure will benefit over 1.7 million aged income support recipients, 250,000 Commonwealth senior health card holders, 700,000 disability support pensioners and 120,000 carer payment recipients. The annual rate of the utilities allowance will increase from $107.20 to $500, and it will be paid in quarterly instalments of $125 for singles and eligible couples combined. This equals a total annual payment of $500 for singles and $250 for each member of a couple. The allowance will be paid quarterly in line with the timing of utility bills. Paying the allowance regularly allows older Australians peace of mind and certainty that they will have the funds on hand to pay their bills.

The bill also expands the qualification criteria for the utilities allowance to cover people under pension or qualifying age and receiving a carer payment, people receiving a disability support pension—particularly pleasing to me as parliamentary secretary for disabilities—people on the invalidity service pension, a partner service pension and income support supplement, a bereavement allowance, a widow B pension and a wife pension. This equals a total annual payment of $500 for singles and $250 for each member of a couple in one of these new groups. Under these two elements, more Australians will receive more assistance to help with their utilities costs.

The bill also significantly increases the rate of seniors concession allowance which is paid to self-funded retirees from $218 to a total annual payment of $500 for each eligible individual self-funded retiree. In another change to make life easier for seniors, this higher rate will also be paid on a quarterly basis, on the same day as the utilities allowance.

Lastly, the bill provides a higher rate of telephone allowance for older Australians, carers and people with a disability, if they receive income support and have an internet connection at home. This higher rate of telephone allowance will be available for eligible veterans and their dependants who have an internet connection at home. The new rate of $132 for singles will be available to those who have a home internet connection, which is an increase from the standard rate of telephone allowance of $88 a year. This will allow older Australians, as well as their carers, and people with a disability to stay in touch with their loved ones via the internet. Affordable home access to the internet has the potential to connect them to a whole new world of communication, information and entertainment.

The member for Warringah wondered about our commitments to pensioners’ reciprocal transport concessions. The Rudd government is delivering on all of its election commitments, including the national reciprocal transport concessions for senior Australians. This would apply to all seniors who have a seniors card, enabling them to get transport concessions when they travel interstate. The Rudd government is committed to working with the states and territories to implement this commitment. In a brave new era of cooperative federalism, we are determined to succeed where the previous government failed or simply did not even try. We have put $50 million on the table, doubling the funding offer from the previous government, and we are confident of a result. In response to the member for Warringah’s second issue related to the budget: like the previous government, the current government does not discuss its budget processes.

This legislation is the latest in a long line of Labor government social security innovations, proving—if any proof is necessary—that Labor is the party which cares about all Australians, which understands that families need support and assistance. The Whitlam government was the first to commit to indexing pensions to cost of living increases and it delivered in its first six months the single mothers benefit, the first Commonwealth income support payment for single parents. Then came the Hawke and Keating governments, which introduced the family assistance package, child support payments and replaced the unemployment benefit with the Newstart job search allowance—linking for the first time social security payments with an active employment participation strategy. The Hawke and Keating governments introduced the sole parent pension and set it at the same rate as the age pension. They replaced the ancient invalid pension with the disability support pension. Then came the superannuation guarantee charge, requiring employers for the first time to make private contributions to employees’ superannuation to protect workers from poverty in retirement, with a comprehensive system bringing financial security for all not just some. I have gone through this because Labor has always been the party which truly cares for and supports Australia’s working families, its older people and its pensioners. I commend the bill to the House.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.