Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion of censure against the Prime Minister.

Leave not granted.

I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would allow the Leader of the Opposition to move a motion against the Prime Minister in relation to pensioners in Australia. I am very concerned—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

R36 Albanese, Anthony, MPMr Albanese—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There is no bill and there is no motion before the House. Where is it?

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move that this House condemns the Prime Minister and his government for their failure to urgently act to help older Australians battling to make ends meet and to live with dignity on the single age pension—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am trying to be helpful here. He sought leave, and then he sought to move a motion. What he has to seek is a suspension, and he has not done that.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And he had not signed it at the time that he was beginning. I am trying to help.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hockey interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought the Leader of the House and the Manager of Opposition Business might have learnt a lesson in the late hours of the last sitting day. The Leader of the Opposition has moved a suspension of standing orders to move a motion. I will seek advice on whether that has now been given to the clerks.

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move that this House condemns the Prime Minister and his government for their failure to urgently act to help older Australians battling to make ends meet and to live with dignity on the single age pension—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Once again, leave has been denied. The Leader of the Opposition has to move a suspension motion. He is not doing that. He must say that that is what he is moving. We are still waiting for your bill. Where is your bill? You told people it was here.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question that is before the House is that so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended that would allow the Leader of the Opposition to move a motion. The written motion that has been given to the clerks goes to that motion, not to the suspension.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Regrettably, that means at this stage I would have to rule that out of order.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Albanese interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House will withdraw that remark.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course, Mr Speaker, but it is a fact that the Leader of the Opposition—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House will resume his seat.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise of a point of order. The Leader of the Opposition was reading out the motion. He is perfectly entitled to read out the motion and then table the motion once he has completed it and it is signed. The Leader of the Opposition still has not read out the motion for which he is seeking to have the standing orders suspended.

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition from moving immediately—That this House:

(1)

condemns Prime Minister Rudd and his Government for their failure to urgently act to help older Australians battling to make ends meet and live with dignity on the single aged pension, and, in particular, for:

(a)

promising Australia last year that they would do something about cost of living pressures when they have done nothing but watch fuel, grocery and housing costs soar;

(b)

the Government’s damning admission that while neither the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister nor the Treasurer could live on the single aged pension rate of $273 per week, they have refused to do anything about it;

(c)

the Government’s failure to increase pensions in the May Budget when the Treasurer’s own Budget speech highlighted an 18 per cent increase in the price of bread and only mentioned ‘pensioners’ once;

(d)

failing to give pensioners real and immediate help despite the fact that his own pension authority, led by Dr Jeff Harmer who is also chairing their new pension review, provided Cabinet with an 83 page report of options to ease pensioners’ pain during recent Budget deliberations;

(e)

failing to support the Coalition’s call for either an additional lump sum payment for pensioners, or an immediate $30 per week increase to the single aged pension; and, most importantly,

(2)

condemns the member for Griffith for turning the job of Prime Minister from a position where tough decisions are made and action is taken into one, under his 10 month term, where process overrides people and where spin masquerades as substance.

Under the previous coalition government, Australian pensioners received on average, for each of the 11 years, a two per cent real increase in the pension above and beyond inflation. The indexation of the pension was matched to a minimum of male average total weekly earnings or the consumer price index. A 30 per cent private health insurance rebate was introduced. There were changes to the tapering rate to allow and encourage pensioners to earn a little bit more income. A utilities allowance was introduced. A lump sum payment annually was introduced. An enormous amount of reforms were introduced to assist the plight of Australian pensioners.

A report which we know that the Prime Minister received prior to the budget this year confirmed, amongst other things, that in the 10 years to 2007, under the previous government, there was an increase in the financial position for people surviving on the age pension of 19 per cent for singles and 19.4 per cent for couples. In other words, through a long period of economic growth and economic certainty, when this country was governed by a government that actually made decisions, a coalition government, Australian pensioners and Australians generally had certainty in relation to their position and their economic future.

In 2007 the then Leader of the Opposition, now the Prime Minister, went around Australia and said a lot of things to Australians. He led them to believe that he would do something about petrol. He led them to believe that he would do something about cost-of-living pressures. He led the pensioners of this country to believe that he would do something about groceries. He led all Australians to believe that in some way he would make things better. Well, less than a year since he came to office, Australians are worse off today than they were under the coalition. And there is no group that is worse off in this country than those living on fixed incomes and, in particular, single age pensioners surviving on $273 a week. In the past week the Prime Minister and six of his frontbench ministers have said that they could not live on $273 a week. They have said they could not do it, and yet they demand that close to 900,000 Australians—full and part pensioners, trying to survive on $273 a week—do exactly that.

Australia’s pensioners and carers remember that, prior to the budget this year, we had a lengthy debate in this parliament about lump sum payments. For five days the Prime Minister would not confirm that he would deliver a lump sum payment to Australia’s pensioners. It was only under pressure from the coalition, the opposition, that he finally admitted that he would deliver a single lump sum payment. We then had the spectacle of the budget speech. We now know that the Prime Minister—who is the chief bureaucrat of the country, not a Prime Minister—shortly after that debate said to his officials: ‘Gee, I’d better write a letter to the Treasurer. There’s going to be a problem with these pensioners.’ So he then gets an 83-page report that tells him precisely what the options are and what the government can do to improve the position of Australian pensioners, delivered by no less than Dr Jeff Harmer. What was his response to that? What was the government’s response? It had all the options. It had an 83-page report. Cost-of-living pressures have gone through the roof under the Rudd Labor government. What did the Prime Minister do? He said, ‘I know—we’ll form a committee, and the committee will be chaired by the same bloke that has just given me an 83-page report.’

So the Australian pensioners sat down to their processed sausages and jam sandwiches for dinner and watched the budget to find out what was going to happen to pensioners in the budget. They watched the budget speech from the Treasurer—that nervous bloke that is in charge of our $1.1 trillion economy—and waited to find out what was going to be delivered for them. In a 30-minute speech on the budget, the word ‘pensioner’ appeared once. Once in 30 minutes, the Treasurer mentioned the word ‘pensioner’. But thanks to The Hollowmen, that ABC documentary about the Prime Minister’s office, the term ‘working families’ appeared, in contrast, 12 times—12 times for ‘working families’, once for ‘pensioners’.

It is important that the Prime Minister appreciates just how desperate the situation is for Australian pensioners. This is a Prime Minister who next week is not going to be in Australia. He is not going to be in the Australian parliament. He is going to visit his 16th country since he has been the Prime Minister. So at the same time that this parliament will be debating the issues of Australian pensioners trying to live on $273 a week—not $273 an hour—the Prime Minister of the country is going to go to the United Nations. He has got a plan for the world, he has got a plan for Asia, but he has got no plan for Australia and no plan to do anything other than wait for a committee to tell him what he has got to do for Australian pensioners.

The Prime Minister needs to understand something, and that is: to live on $273 a week under a Rudd Labor government is the most distressing and hardest thing that close to 900,000 Australians are doing. I have received, for example, an email today from a lady in Woodcroft, South Australia, who says:

I am appalled at Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan’s response to suggestions for an immediate increase for single pensioners. Does this not indicate a complete disregard and lack of understanding for the plight of pensioners or is it simply a contempt for a section of the Australian community that are unable to give Kevin Rudd the global kudos he appears to crave? I have to go to the supermarket to buy packets of toilet rolls, bread and a can of Homebrand baked beans plus any visits I might have to make to my local GP.

Prime Minister, that is the reality for Australia’s pensioners—baked beans and jam sandwiches. That is what they are living on when you are at the United Nations General Assembly and the parliament sits at the cost of $1 million a day.

It is time that the government made a decision, instead of having a committee to organise a committee to tell you what to do. Prime Minister, these are the men and women who have made this country what it is. It is their sacrifices that gave our generation what we have. They did not buy something until they had saved up for it. They thought their responsibilities to one another and their country were more important than their rights. They thought that values were more important than the value of things. Thanks to the previous coalition government, the Labor government sit on a $22 billion surplus while Australian pensioners live on baked beans and jam sandwiches.

Prime Minister, the whole idea of being the Prime Minister is to make decisions in the interests of Australia. The pensioners of this country are diminished. You are diminished. Your government is diminished. You have demeaned our country by not delivering an immediate increase in the single base rate of age pension. It is disgraceful.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

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 second the motion. This motion is about the fraudulence of the government, which says it cares about pensioners and says that pensioners cannot live on what they are being paid, and yet does not do anything to address their real problems now. It is impossible to go on national television and say that the single rate pension is totally inadequate and then not do anything about it. It is impossible to say that and not do anything about it, unless you are a total fraud—someone who parades and frets and struts as the friend of the pensioners and workers but in fact is the friend of nothing but the slush fund which members opposite are creating for the state governments.

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I did not do this for the Leader of the Opposition but I will do this for this member. This is a motion to suspend standing orders. Standing orders require him to address that question and not go into the substantive debate. That occurs if standing orders are suspended. I would ask you to call him to order.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Banks has made his point of order and in the absolute strict sense he is correct. The Leader of the Opposition was allowed a great deal of leeway. I remind the member for Warringah of the fact that we are now debating the reasons for suspending standing orders.

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

Mr Speaker, it is absolutely urgent that we debate pensions now, because pensioners have a problem now. They have a problem now, which members opposite know about. We have had a succession of ministers admit that there is a problem now, led by the Prime Minister. Let’s do something about it now. That is why we have to have a debate now—not in a week’s time, not in a month’s time and not in a year’s time or two years time. We should have a debate about this problem now, because the problem is now.

It says something about the fraudulence and the phoniness of this government and this Prime Minister that they say that there is a problem—they say they cannot live on the single rate of the pension—and what do they do? They do not fix the problem, they do not resolve it and they do not decide it; they study it. That is so typical of this government. They cannot make a decision on anything, even on a problem which is staring them so much in the face that they are forced to admit it time and time again on national television.

What we have heard from members opposite today is that the former government did nothing about it. The former government did everything about it. I refer members opposite to a statement from their very own public servants which says: ‘Pension rates have grown by more than two per cent a year above inflation over the last decade.’ The single base rate of the age pension has increased from about $9,000 to about $14,000 a year thanks to the work of the Howard government. Pensions today are 57 per cent higher than they were in March 1996. They are 24 per cent higher in real terms thanks to the Howard government. Pensioners have bonuses now thanks to the Howard government—no thanks to members opposite who wanted to abolish the pensioners bonus in the budget. It only survived because the department of the minister for families leapt on the Treasury to protect the bonus that they knew was necessary and which Treasury wanted to scrap. Pensioners now have a utilities allowance thanks to the Howard government—and no thanks to members opposite who simply lifted Howard government proposals from the election campaign.

What we had from the Prime Minister was a claim today that he had a program for action. His program for action is not action now; it is action possibly in February next, possibly in May next year, but most likely in May 2010 and then only because there is an election looming. That surplus does not belong to him; it belongs to the people of Australia. What he is saying is that he would rather give that surplus to the states than spend it on pensioners. Pensioners will not forget this. In voting against this motion, the Prime Minister is voting against the pensioners of Australia—and they have very long memories. Standing orders should be suspended and this House should debate pensions now.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This confected anger from those opposite is extraordinary. What we want to know is this: when this issue was before cabinet this time last year, which way did you vote? Did you consider then that you could live on $273 a week when you voted no to a proposal from the previous minister for families to increase the base rate of the pension?

Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Mr Speaker, could you ask the minister to address her remarks through the chair?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will refer her remarks through the chair.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition have decided today that they want a suspension of standing orders to bring on an urgent debate about the pension. Last week they said that they wanted to bring on an urgent debate to have a new bill brought into the parliament. Well, here is the Notice Paper for today. Is there any mention anywhere on the Notice Paper today of this proposed bill? There is no mention whatsoever. Last week it was so urgent because the Leader of the Opposition was in so much trouble with his leadership. That is what this political stunt is all about. This opposition will go to the most extraordinary lengths and use pensioners. How low can a politician go that he will use pensioners—

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On the point that was made on the previous debate, this is a motion for the suspension of standing orders.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for O’Connor will resume his seat.

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you want to get into brown paper arguments—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for O’Connor is warned! Leeway was given to the Leader of the Opposition; I made comments on the member for Banks’s point of order.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no bill on the Notice Paper here today probably because the Leader of the Opposition finally figured out, via Laurie Oakes when he was cross-examining the member for North Sydney yesterday, that the member for North Sydney had no clue that it is completely unconstitutional for them to put a bill like this into the parliament. There is no bill here in the parliament today. So much for it being urgent; there is nothing on the Notice Paper today.

The member for Warringah should actually read the responses to his blog in the Daily Telegraph today because I think members of the public have really summed up their view of what this opposition is all about. One voter says:

This is cheap politics at its lowest point and part of the reason Howard (and Nelson, and Abbott) were given the flick.

“Mean and Tricky” was the Liberal Party’s own assessment of itself and how true it still is …

Another writer says to the member for Warringah:

You can’t start blaming the current government, for former Liberal party indifference to our elderly!

Of course, it is the case that pensioners did not all of a sudden start needing an improvement in the base rate of the pension on 24 November last year.

We have had a look at the coalition’s policy that they took to the election. Was there any mention of increasing the base rate of the pension? There was absolutely none. We know from a book that is supposed to be released today that the former Treasurer argued against the former minister for families, Mal Brough, when he wanted to increase the base rate of the pension—Mr Howard opposed it, the member for Higgins opposed it and the cabinet opposed it. That is why there was no increase in the base rate of the pension. What did we do when we first came into government? We recognised that pensioners were under significant financial pressure. In the first piece of legislation that I put into the parliament we increased the utilities allowance from $170 to $500 a year. For the first time—it was not the previous government that did this—we extended that utilities allowance to carers and to people on the disability support pension. That had never been done before. As a result of our move all of those people are now getting a $500 utilities allowance which they did not get under the Howard government.

What do we have from those opposite in this hastily cobbled together proposal from the Leader of the Opposition? It was hastily cobbled together because he is under so much political pressure from those sitting behind him. We have no bill. There is no new proposal in front of the parliament, and if they do finally get their act together what we know is that they are going to leave out 2.2 million pensioners, carers, veterans, people on the disability support pension and married couples who are on the pension who are also doing it tough.

Let us have a look at some of the comments that were made by some of some of the people who are doing it so hard in our community and who the Leader of the Opposition has decided he can just ignore. The carers put out a press release just last week, following the Leader of the Opposition’s proposal that completely ignored carers. They said:

The fact that the current proposal from the Leader of the Opposition leaves out so many Australians further highlights the need for long-term reform—

this is the carers saying this—

The significance of the pension review cannot be overstated.

But, of course, the Leader of the Opposition thinks that he knows better than carers. Rob Allen, from a group representing those on the disability support pension, says when talking about the Leader of the Opposition:

If his concern is genuine and not a stunt to politically grandstand, then they must not only advocate for an increase in the disability support pension and carer payment but he must also explain to the Australian community why they were not considered in the first place.

How true that is. I really thought the comment from the Vietnam veterans summed it up. The National President of the Vietnam Veterans Association said:

Dr Nelson spent Tuesday speaking with hundreds of veterans at the RSL’s national congress, yet the next day seemed to have forgotten about us altogether.

This Leader of the Opposition hastily cobbles together a proposal apparently designed to increase the single base rate of the pension. He is ignoring married pensioners, carers and those on the disability support pension. He is ignoring all of those people because all he is about is saving his own political hide. There is no proposal whatsoever before the parliament; he has offered no properly costed proposal. This is the other issue. This Leader of the Opposition has demonstrated that he cares only about his own leadership. He does not care about getting the proposal right. He is ignoring 2.2 million pensioners and he cannot cost his policy. The costings that he has proposed for the single base rate of the pension are about $900 million shy of what it would actually cost. He cannot cost the policy, he cannot get a bill ready for the parliament and he leaves out 2.2 million pensioners.

The Australian public is well aware that this is a political stunt. It is all aimed at protecting this failing Leader of the Opposition’s leadership. A number of people in the media who are engaging in serious commentary recognise that this is a very complex task, and it is one that this government is determined to get right. We are not going to play politics with pensioners. We have already delivered an increase of $900 to pensioners and carers to ensure they get the extra support they need. On top of that, we have delivered an increase in the telephone allowance and we are ensuring that their transport concessions can be used across state boundaries. All of these changes are available to pensioners to ensure that they can better make ends meet. We know that the social security system is complex. We intend to get it right and not play politics like this Leader of the Opposition is.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for the debate has concluded.

Question put:

That the motion (Dr Nelson’s) be agreed to.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.