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

I have received a letter from the honourable member for McPherson proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The urgent need for the Government to respond to rapidly growing pressures on single age pensioners, single service pensioners and Widow B pensioners

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Prior to the last election the Prime Minister spent months and months telling the Australian people—pensioners, in particular—that he was on their side and that they would be priority No. 1 once he was in the Lodge. But after 10 months in government, 10 months sitting on the government benches, those opposite have abandoned older Australians. Let me read to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, from a Labor Party media statement, dated 13 June 2007, available on the Labor Party website. It says:

Most older Australians struggle to make ends meet on low fixed incomes such as the aged pension …

It goes on:

Older Australians are the lifeblood of the nation. They protected us during World War II and through their hard work they have built our national prosperity.

I say credit where credit is due. I agree completely with those sentiments. Older Australians are our national treasures. They worked hard, they fought wars, they made sacrifices that we take for granted today. They deserve our respect and support in their senior years—unconditionally!

I know those opposite are avid supporters of opinion polls and focus groups and I know they love the media. In fact, wasn’t it former Prime Minister Paul Keating who referred to them as ‘tea-leaf-reading, focus group driven polling types’? Opinion poll after opinion poll and media story after media story are giving the government one, simple, unambiguous message: pensioners need your help and they need it now. So these tea-leaf-reading, focus group driven polling types—the mob opposite—are really not getting the message. I have got news for the Prime Minister, even though he is not here; for the Acting Prime Minister; for the Treasurer; for the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs; for the Minister for Ageing, who is at the table in this House; and for all those sitting on the government benches: as much as they would like it, this issue is far from dead and buried. Pensioners right across this nation are outraged that this government not only has failed them—as if that isn’t bad enough in itself—but does not care about them either. I would be outraged too. What a slap in the face to the many thousands of single age pensioners, single service pensioners and widow B pensioners in this country. The Prime Minister travelled to Niue for the Pacific Islands Forum last month, and there he was in all the photos, like an emperor sitting on his throne. I can just imagine what he was mumbling to himself as he looked down from his throne: let them eat cake! That is what it has come to, except it is not cake but baked beans that our pensioners are living on.

This government just does not get it. We have got the Harmer review, we have got the Henry review and we also had the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs. Reviews and reports do not put food on the table. Our pensioners cannot eat reviews. Increases in the cost of living are placing enormous pressures on our pensioners. Let me tell you about a few items you are likely to find in any pensioner’s shopping basket. Pensioners buy bread. I am sure we all agree bread is not a luxury item. How much do you think the cost of bread has risen by in the first six months under the Rudd government? By 3.2 per cent. What about tea and coffee? These are also not luxury items and are beverages enjoyed by many pensioners across the country. How much has the cost of tea and coffee risen by in the first six months of the Rudd government? By 3.6 per cent. And the list goes on. The cost of butter and margarine has gone up 7.6 per cent. The cost of pharmaceuticals have gone up 12.1 per cent. The cost of electricity has gone up 4.6 per cent. The cost of petrol has gone up 14.6 per cent. I have not even mentioned the rises in rents and general living expenses.

The government are well and truly aware of these rises in the cost of living, and they are well and truly aware of the pressures these rises place on our pensioners. Struggling pensioners are crying out for immediate action, and the government are ignoring them. Those opposite ask why the opposition have left out some groups in our call for a $30-a-week rise in the single age pension, the single service pension and the widow B pension. I have got news for those opposite, who sit in the seats with the power to do something about this. The opposition’s measure is about helping thousands of older Australians; it is about helping those who are most in immediate need of assistance. Single age pensioners live on $273 a week. I ask those opposite: how far does that go?

The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Treasurer and a few others on the back bench have admitted they could not live on $273 dollars a week, yet they have the power to do something about it. They have the power to tell our older Australians: ‘You know what? You’ve done our nation proud. You deserve a certain standard of living in your retirement, and we’re going to do something about it.’ Those on this side of the chamber recognise that. Those on this side of the chamber are saying just that to our pensioners.

The Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs claims the opposition is ignoring two million pensioners. The minister should think very carefully before throwing that accusation around. Perhaps she has not noticed that, while we on this side of the House have committed to taking the first step—that is right: the first step but by no means the last—towards helping pensioners who desperately need assistance, the minister and her government are ignoring every pensioner in this country. I have a simple solution: do something, not nothing, about it. They do not even have to do the work; we have written the bill already.

Instead, what do we get from the government? We have the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs calling the opposition’s motion ‘a stunt’ during question time on 22 September. We have the member for Blair on the same day saying:

This motion is a stunt—pure and simple.

Yesterday during question time the Treasurer said:

We have this ploy on pensions in the House today …

First it is a stunt; then it is a ploy. Obviously their focus group responded better to the use of the word ‘ploy’ than ‘stunt’, so Lachlan Harris updated the talking points.

Here is the clanger. Here is the truth of the matter. Here is how those on the government benches really feel about pensioners:

This is not real work; this is meaningless politics from those opposite.

Who said that yesterday in this place? It was none other than the Leader of the House, the member for Grayndler. This government is out of touch. It did not take it long—just 10 months. We have an ageing population. We all know that is a fact—it is something we all agree on—but, with the way the Rudd government is leading this country, we will have a sick ageing population. This government is putting the health and welfare of older Australians at risk. Why? For what purpose? For a review and yet another review.

We left them with a robust surplus. Start using it responsibly. There are more than 5,900 single age pensioners in my electorate of McPherson. In the neighbouring electorate of Richmond, the electorate of the Minister for Ageing—the member for Richmond is in the House today—there are more than 7,300 single age pensioners. When I return home at the end of this week, I know what I will be saying to the pensioners of my electorate. Has the Minister for Ageing decided what she will say to the single age pensioners, single service pensioners and widow B pensioners of her electorate? She should seriously think about it.

I read today in the Daily News that there will be a pensioner protest rally outside her office when she returns on Friday. That is something for her to look forward to. I am not sure the minister will get the message, though. There was a pensioner rally in Tweed on 30 June. Both the minister and I attended that rally, and she certainly did not get the message then. The chief executive of National Seniors Australia, Michael O’Neill, told the Age newspaper that he would be encouraging the 280,000 members of his organisation to contact their local MP to demand an explanation.

This is what it has come to—pensioners in revolt. They stripped on the streets of Melbourne earlier this year to vent their anger. They wanted their message heard because it was falling on deaf ears. This is why the government’s actions—or inaction—are so baffling. They say they could not live on $273 a week; they acknowledge how tough pensioners are doing it right now; yet, in some bizarre attempt to reassure pensioners, they tell them to stop whingeing because they were paid the seniors bonus and the utilities allowance in the 2007-08 budget.

After the May budget the Prime Minister hit the airwaves, extolling the virtues and benefits of the budget for pensioners. In Melbourne he said:

… in the case of seniors, they have been provided with $900 per year more than they were in the previous budget of Mr Howard …

The Treasurer had the same thing to say in Perth, and the minister for families said the same thing in Brisbane. Even the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator McLucas, gave it a red-hot going over, speaking at a pensioner rally in West End.

Let me set them all straight, courtesy of Dennis Atkins writing in the Courier-Mail on 24 May this year. He writes:

Of that claimed “$900 extra”, $500 was a repeat of the seniors’ bonus introduced by Howard last year. The rest was the $393 increase in the utilities allowance from the Howard government’s $107 to $500.

But there is more. Atkins goes on to say:

This means the net increase for the majority of seniors from this Budget was $7.50 a week which would buy a regular Big Mac meal.

Pensioners are a smart lot. They can see right through this government’s spin. They know exactly how poorly they fared in this year’s budget. Let me read to you from a letter to the editor of my local newspaper, the Gold Coast Bulletin. The letter writer says:

Things might be going swimmingly well in Wayne’s world. However, in the world of Australia’s aged pensioners it is a daily struggle to survive as they drown in a sea of ever-increasing food prices, sky-high petrol hikes and electricity, water and gas prices that produce a standard of living that can best be described as being on the breadline.

Every pensioner in this country understands they do not have the support of this government. How can they have confidence in their local Labor member and their government when they so blatantly slap them across the face and say, ‘No, you are not deserving of help; you are not deserving of assistance from this government’? As those opposite head back to their electorates this week, they should ask themselves whether the pensioners living in their electorates should cancel Christmas this year. This government will have a lot to answer for if the most vulnerable people in this country cannot afford to celebrate Christmas. Will the Prime Minister be the Grinch Who Stole Christmas?

This government is running out of time. It has the opportunity, it has the motive, it has the power and, dare I say it, it has the obligation to do something for the pensioners of this country—and do it now. Those opposite promised pensioners the world prior to the last election—the world—and all they have delivered is a can of baked beans.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It truly is amazing. We had 12 years of inaction from those opposite—they are all leaving the chamber now. When they had an opportunity to act, what did they do? Absolutely nothing. What has the member for McPherson been doing in relation to these issues in the last 10 years? We see that the member for Warringah, the shadow minister, is not here today. We know that is because he is not interested in pensions; he has made that pretty clear. Indeed, we had 12 years of inaction from those opposite across a whole range of issues. It was not just pensions; there was health care. The only thing we had action on was Work Choices. They were the party of Work Choices; that is what they gave us. But when it came to pensions they did nothing.

But the Rudd Labor government is committed to taking decisive action when it comes to assisting pensioners. There is no question at all that many pensioners are doing it tough. We acknowledge that. Many single age pensioners are struggling to meet rising living costs for things such as rent, petrol and food—we certainly know that. But other pensioners are struggling too, including half a million carers and people with a disability, who only have their pension of $281 a week to rely on. In their rush to score political points, the opposition forgot about two million Australian pensioners. They did not care about them. Carers, people with a disability, wife pensioners and pensioner couples will be excluded from the scheme that the Liberals and Nationals have put forward. What about those people? Where do they rate in this scheme? Absolutely nowhere. The plight of around half a million single pensioners and people with a disability, carers and widows in exactly the same financial circumstances as single age pensioners, living on $281 a week, have been totally ignored by the opposition. What are they saying to them? When they go back to their electorates, what are they saying about those two million people who are being completely ignored?

We know that pensioners need some extra help. That is why we increased the utilities allowance to $500 a year and decided to pay the instalments every three months. It is also why, for the first time, we extended it to the disabled and carers. This fortnight, pensioners, age pensioners, carers, disability support pensioners and veterans will receive their third quarterly instalment of $128 to help with their bills. While the opposition has forgotten about carers and people with a disability and has left them behind, this fortnight, because of this new government, they will receive an extra $128.

The government’s position on pensions has always been clear. In opposition, Labor instituted a Senate inquiry into the cost-of-living pressures facing seniors. Indeed, the first recommendation of the bipartisan—

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mrs May interjecting

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for McPherson was heard in silence.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McPherson is very keen to hear about the recommendations from the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs inquiry, so I will just refresh her on that. Its recommendation was:

… the Government review the suitability of the base pension levels through economic analyses of amounts required to achieve at least a modest standard of living for retired Australians, with particular consideration given to the adequacy of the percentage rate for single older people receiving the age pension compared to couples.

On budget night, the government acted on this bipartisan recommendation by instituting the Henry review of tax and welfare. We understand the urgency of this and that is why we acted. The government has asked Dr Jeff Harmer to complete this matter as part of the Henry review and report back to the government by no later than February next year. The pensions review is well underway with over 600 submissions.

During the Senate inquiry, and since that time, we have received many, many calls from different seniors groups, disability groups and carers groups to improve pensions and payments in those submissions. This range of views shows that the pension system is very complex, and that is why we have to analyse it properly. There are many different positions. Many different proposals are being put forward, and we have to look at them. This confirms that the responsible course of action was to undertake a comprehensive investigation into the pension, not just provide some quick political fix that excludes two million pensioners.

The government is being very responsible and the opposition are playing really cheap politics. The opposition’s private member’s bill was just a very cruel political stunt, an act that pitted pensioner against pensioner. The Liberals and Nationals had 12 years to fix the pension system. When they had the power to act the opposition did absolutely nothing, and now all they can do is play cheap politics with a really important issue for millions of Australians. In fact, when they had a chance to do something last year when they were in government, what did the Howard cabinet do? They voted against raising the base rate of the single pension. We know the opposition are playing cheap politics here, because their proposal leaves behind two million pensioners.

Not only was the bill that the opposition put forward unconstitutional but so many of its policies were also fundamentally flawed. Because of their absolute haste to cobble together this quick fix, the bill they put forward was riddled with flaws. It had not been properly thought out, just cobbled together. The opposition’s proposed increase was not even indexed, and its value eroded over time—yet another mean and tricky Liberal and National parties scheme. It also created serious inequities in the pension system, which was very unfair. They have not been able to explain these inequities or why they have come about. They have just put it all together and so many people totally missed out. They know that people have missed out, they know that there are inequities, they know that it is not fair—but they do not care. They do not care at all that they were misleading Australian pensioners in their rush to score these quick political points.

Unlike the opposition, the government is determined to get it right for the long term. We have made a down payment on reform with some immediate assistance for pensioners. That is why we increased the utilities allowance to $514 a year and decided to pay the instalments every three months. This fortnight, all pensioners—age pensioners, carers, disability support pensioners, widows, wives and veterans—will receive their quarterly utilities allowance instalment of $128 to help with their bills. As well, all single pensioners will this week get the regular pension indexation increase of $15.30. So we have taken immediate action. We have increased and extended the utilities allowance. We have increased the telephone allowance to $138 for those with a home internet connection. We have also paid cash bonuses—$500 to seniors, $1,000 to those on carer payment and $600 in carer allowance—because we know that those pensioners are doing it tough.

But, when it comes to reforming the pension system, we know that it needs a lot more than the quick fix that the Liberal and National parties have put forward. That is why we are having the comprehensive review and why we have had over 600 submissions in relation to it. All these views will be taken into consideration because the government is absolutely focused on reform and on getting it right for the long term, not on a political quick fix.

Earlier, the member for McPherson referred to my seat of Richmond, and I would like to raise the issue of the number of people there who will miss out under the Liberal-National Party scheme. Indeed, there are 17,772 pensioners in my electorate of Richmond who will miss out under the Liberal-National Party scheme. They have been totally forgotten. That is a lot of people. Let us have a look at the electorate of the member for McPherson. How many people in her seat would miss out? It would be 12,652. What is she going to tell those people?

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mrs May interjecting

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She is saying she cannot do much for those 12½ thousand people. She will have to go back and talk with all of those people and explain it to them. The member for Moncrieff is in the chamber as well. Indeed, in his seat 12,213 pensioners are going to miss out. You can speak to each of those people about that. I raise, too, the seat of Cowper, where we have 19,430 people missing out—a huge number. Even in the seat of the Leader of the Opposition 7,131 people are absolutely missing out because of the unfair scheme that the coalition have put forward.

This government is acting. The previous government were inactive when it came to a whole range of issues—not just pensions but health care as well. They ripped $1 billion out of our hospitals and health care. We are committed to fixing that by putting $1 billion into that and $600 million into elective surgery—

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mrs May interjecting

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear the member for McPherson raising the issue of Murwillumbah hospital. I note that she has raised this issue a number of times in the House. Indeed, the Nationals Senator Fiona Nash has also raised it. I find it quite interesting that they have raised this. As I said before, this government is putting massive amounts of money back into our hospitals after the inaction of the previous government. We also have the $10 billion Health and Hospitals Fund. We are very proud of that commitment.

As the member for McPherson and Senator Nash know, service delivery is a state issue. Maybe the member for McPherson and Senator Fiona Nash think they are in state parliament. We know Senator Nash is keen to run for a state seat and has her eye on the Tweed. That is why she flies into Tweed and flies out again.

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

Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order on the issue of relevance. It is clear the minister has run out of things to say about pensioners. She is talking about senators running for state seats.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The issue here is one of responding to the rapidly growing pressures on these people. One of the biggest pressures on pensioners is health care. That is why we have committed massive funds.

Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s about dental care too.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A very good point has been raised about dental care. That is a huge issue for pensioners. Perhaps the other side should be passing legislation allowing hundreds of thousands of Australians to access decent dental care. The position, particularly in your electorates, is that there are people—hundreds of thousands of people throughout Australia as well—who cannot access decent dental care.

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They could under the Medicare scheme that you abolished.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McPherson had her turn earlier.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In fact, the previous government abolished the Commonwealth Dental Scheme. You are the ones who left pensioners out there unable to eat because they could not get their teeth fixed.

Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not true!

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Riverina is warned!

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have a plan in place to reinstate the Commonwealth dental plan, and if the Liberal and National parties passed that then many hundreds of thousands of pensioners would be able to actually get their teeth fixed. It is shameful that that has not happened. You are stopping those people getting their teeth fixed.

I will also raise a couple of issues in relation to aged care. I am proud to be the Minister for Ageing and proud of the fact that this government is putting in $40 billion over the next four years. Interestingly, the member for McPherson hardly ever raises aged care and issues surrounding it, but we are very proud of our commitment. We have certainly increased funding right across the board. Aged care is one of the growing pressures for many pensioners, but we have a major commitment to it. We have had 12 years of neglect when it comes to aged care. I talked about a number of other issues before, such as pensions and health care, but in aged care as well we are fixing the neglect of 12 years. We are investing more money to have more beds available. Indeed, we have also increased the number of spot checks, and the accreditation agency now has a greater role to make people—

Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

More bureaucracy, more red tape.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McPherson is warned!

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I make no apologies to anyone in the House for standing up for older Australians when it comes to their health and safety.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can hear opposition members mocking. Well, I make no apologies about this. We make sure that older Australians are safe, no matter where their nursing home is. We have increased the accreditation standards as well.

In the couple of minutes I have left, I will talk about how a lot of veterans are being left out under the opposition’s scheme. They have left so many people out, and I listed some of the problems before. The opposition claim that this measure includes 70,000 veterans, but the opposition’s definition means the figure is actually 35,000. So they have left out a heap of veterans as well. A huge number of people have been left out—two million people right across Australia.

The member for McPherson asked earlier about the rally that will be held in my electorate on Friday. I certainly will be there speaking about the very decisive action that the Rudd government has taken since it came into government after 12 years of nothing from the Liberal and National parties. Since we have been in government there has been very decisive action. We have increased the utilities allowance, the telephone allowance and the bonuses that are being paid, and we are having a comprehensive review of our pension system to get the whole process right.

The opposition left things in disarray. They did not care. They cobbled together this political quick fix. But a lot of people are very angry that that little fix left out two million people. They can see through it to what it is. We are committed to taking decisive action. We are committed to getting the system right. We are committed to making sure that we have in place comprehensive reform of our pension and taxation systems, and we are doing it for the long term. All we see from the opposition is this political quick fix approach to things. We are committed to the long term, to tackling the challenges of the 21st century, and one of those is making sure we get this right. (Time expired)

Louise Markus (Greenway, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What does the Labor government have against pensioners? Another very important question is: why will the Labor government not help pensioners cope with the increased cost of living? We have all heard the rhetoric, but the simple fact remains that the government have an opportunity to help pensioners and they are refusing to do so. The coalition is not sitting on its hands when it comes to helping pensioners. The most important people in this debate are the thousands of pensioners waiting for solutions. The Urgent Relief for Single Age Pensioners Bill 2008 was passed in the Senate on Monday night. This bill helps the most vulnerable pensioners: the single age pensioners, the single service pensioners and widow B pensioners.

Members on this side of the House have been out and about talking and listening to pensioners, asking what issues are facing them. But the Labor Party are in denial. They make excuses and they talk a lot of hot air—just like their election promises. Let us reflect on Labor’s election promises and the expectations they raised in the community that they had the solutions to rising petrol prices and rising grocery prices. Labor promised to ease the pressure on working families, but they failed to mention pensioners. What is the solution? An inquiry—let’s talk some more! It does not report until March 2009—again, waiting and watching. This pension review adds to more than 165 reviews, committees, inquiries and consultations that the Rudd government has commissioned. It is obvious Labor does not have an answer, and pensioners have to wait 12 months before they get any help from the government.

The coalition has provided a solution now. Decisive action is needed more than ever, and the coalition’s bill to increase the single age pension, the single service pension and the widow B pension needs to be supported immediately. Pensioners need help today. We have started with the single age pensioners, the single service pensioners and the widow B pensioners because they are the most vulnerable. The current single rate of pension is 60 per cent of the combined couple rate. It is lower than the average for major OECD countries, which stands at 63 per cent. The proposed increase of $30 per week would bring the single age pension in line with the OECD average. By failing to support a $30 increase, Labor must have the view that these pensioners do not need an increase. Labor is saying that these pensioners are doing okay and can wait a year or maybe longer—who knows?—before they can get help. Labor is watching and waiting, watching and waiting.

Labor appears to lack understanding. Older Australians’ contribution to this nation is immeasurable. The members opposite should pay attention. Almost half of older Australians aged 65 to 74 years provide unpaid assistance to someone outside of their home. One-third, around 33 per cent, provide volunteer services through community organisations. Twenty-nine per cent are actively involved in other community organisations and support groups of various kinds. The community could not move forward without the contributions of these older Australians. What about the grandfathers and grandmothers who care for their children while their parents work just to keep a roof over their heads? In these uncertain times, pensioners need to know that someone not only is listening but also cares about their circumstances and is prepared to act. Labor, by its refusal to adopt the increase of $30, fails these tests. Labor does not have the answers and will not even address the question, ‘When are you going to help single age pensioners, single service pensioners and widow B pensioners?’ Let us look at the 700 widow B pensioners. By refusing to support the coalition’s solution to assist pensioners, is the Labor Party saying that these 700 widows do not matter?

Of the nearly 900,000 single age pensioners, whose payment is 60 per cent of the combined couple rate, how many are now, as we speak, selling their cars, their assets, and their lifelong memorabilia just to put food on the table? For the many thousands of single age service pensioners this is just another example of how little the Labor government care about the contribution our oldest service men and women have made to this country. In question time today, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs failed to explain why he would not support the $30 rise for these pensions. The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs prefers that all pensioners miss out. Are the pensioners the coalition is proposing to help worth it? They are. This is another failure to act by Labor. They may acknowledge the problem, but then they ignore it.

On Monday in question time, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs said that the coalition’s urgent relief bill was ‘a stunt’. What about easing the cost-of-living pressures that continue to build for pensioners? The minister obviously prefers to do nothing. How does that help anyone? The veteran community deserve better. These people have laid down their lives for this country. They have made great sacrifices in carrying out their duty and responsibility, and help for this community should not be labelled a stunt. Such a statement diminishes their value. Responsibility for pension and entitlement payments lies squarely with the federal government. It is a matter of urgency that this increase is given to single pensioners.

But the coalition has stepped in. While the government dithers and waits for the outcome of another review, the coalition has taken decisive action and put forward a solution. The coalition when in government had a strong record of helping older Australians. It was the coalition that introduced the bonus programs in relation to pensioners’ utilities and telephones and the $500 bonus because we recognised that government funded pensions and allowances are the main source of income for most people aged 65 and over. These people do not have the capacity to find extra to cover the rising cost of groceries, fuel and other living expenses. Pensioners are having to cut back on their social outings. They cannot afford to put fuel in their cars.

It was the coalition that introduced the bonuses program, which Labor opposed but now claim to be their idea. It was due to the coalition government’s sound economic management and strong leadership that the incoming Labor government came into government with a fiscal surplus of $22 billion. It is a surplus which Labor are not willing to share in these tough, financially uncertain times with Australia’s most vulnerable individuals. The coalition left Labor with a healthy surplus and no government debt. Yet the government disparage the coalition’s action in trying to help single age pensioners, single service pensioners and widow B pensioners. The coalition started with this group of pensioners because they are the most vulnerable in the community.

The pension review background summary Australia’s future tax system shows that the age pension rate for single, living alone homeowners and single renters, whether in public or private accommodation, was below the relevant budget standard. These people do the least well as they do not have the economies of scale. Overall, the cost of living has increased by 4.5 per cent in the 12 months to June 2008. The coalition have taken action by introducing a bill to give the most vulnerable pensioners an increase in their pension, and we do not intend to stop there. The coalition are concerned at the defiant stance by Labor— (Time expired)

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

The coalition’s speeches on this matter of public importance so far have been ill conceived and disingenuous. Pensioners are important. Older Australians are important. The greatest miracle of the 20th century in Australia is the fact that we are living 25 years longer than we were 100 years ago. But this matter of public importance is not about older Australians. This is not about a beauty parade to show which party respects older Australians more. The debate as presented by the coalition has been artful, insincere and a mere tactic.

To support my contention that the speeches made by the coalition are disingenuous, I have five propositions. First of all, the debate by the coalition implies that nothing is being done. That is not true. Secondly, their proposition ignores far too many people who deserve public discussion, political support and leadership from both parties. It is not fair. Thirdly, their debate fails to accept any responsibility for 12 years of inaction. What a blessing it must be to belong to a political party that have amnesia when in opposition—so that everything that happened when they were in government should not be held to account. Not a good proposition. Fourthly, the debate by the coalition has triggered scepticism in other people, third parties, about the coalition’s commitment—based, I have to say, on the evidence of their last 12 years of government. Fifthly, the coalition’s debate falls short of the real issues.

The Rudd government knows things are tough. You cannot fix 12 years of neglect overnight, but there are things on the scoreboard already: $600 to the carers allowance; cash bonuses—$500 to seniors and $1,000 to those on carer payments; $514 to the utilities allowance—$128 quarterly. And this goes to all pensioners, not just some pensioners—people on the DSP, the widows, the wives, the veterans, the carers and the aged. The telephone allowance has gone up to $138, so that those older people who are able to be on the internet can actually get their costs paid for. We have seen the regular pension indexation increase by $15.30. We have extended the utilities allowance to people on the carers payment and the DSP. And the list goes on.

Labor in opposition instituted the Senate inquiry into cost-of-living pressures facing senior Australians. A bipartisan report tabled on 20 March 2008 recommended:

… that the Government review the suitability of the base pension levels through economic analyses of amounts required to achieve at least a modest standard of living for retired Australians, with particular consideration given to the adequacy of the percentage rate for single older people receiving the age pension compared to couples.

On 20 March the bipartisan report was tabled and on budget night we acted, with the Henry review on taxation and welfare. In recognising the urgency of the pensions issue, the government has fast-tracked the review by asking Dr Jeff Harmer, the very capable secretary of the FaHCSIA department, to complete this part of the review and report back to the government by February next year—and this is already well underway. There have been 600 written submissions and 250 oral submissions. We are getting on with business.

The second reason that I think that the coalition’s criticism of the government is unfounded is that they neglect two million other pensioners. I do appreciate the coalition raising the MPI to the extent that it lets me talk about Australians with a disability—a particular passion of mine. There are 13,000 people over the age pension age who are on carer payments or the disability support pension. These people would miss out under the coalition’s proposal. There are over one million couple pensioners who would miss out on the payment under the coalition’s proposal. There are more than 730,000 disability support pensioners who would miss out under the coalition’s regime.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The interjector says, ‘Make an amendment.’ It is your motion; you do the work. We have already got a plan to assist all these people, and we are not going to be distracted by the makeshift tactics of the opposition. Furthermore, we have 78,000 single age pensioners living in public housing who will lose a quarter of this mythical increase in charges. In my own electorate of Maribyrnong, in the north-western suburbs of Melbourne, 8,700 couple pensioners would miss out under the coalition strategy rather than our strategy, and 1,100 carer payment recipients and 4,800-plus DSP recipients would also miss out. This is the problem with the coalition proposition: too many people miss out, because they do not understand a lot of the issues around pensioners.

The third reason why the coalition’s propositions are disingenuous, mischievous, erroneous and artful is that 12 years of inaction failed to achieve very much. It is pretty easy to spend someone else’s money, I suggest to the opposition. I have had a look at what the weekly rate was when Paul Keating was defeated and the Howard government came in. It was about $173 per week. During the time the coalition were in government—11 years and eight months—the pension increased by a total of $97. Now they are in opposition, they can be friends to all, because they do not have to try to sort out the long-term strategy for all pensioners.

If they want to talk about inaction, why is it that they never talk about the disability support pensioners? In Australia in the last 20 years, the plight of the disabled has been one of the public policy disgraces of Australian politics. Why is it that people with a disability, those on the pension, have lower homeownership and lower educational outcomes? The fastest growing pension in Australia was the disability support pension under the old government, because of the low unemployment rates. I suggest that the coalition’s proposition is belated, tardy, overdue, past due and delayed, when they had the power to do something that they failed to do.

Many others do not believe the credibility of the opposition. Dr Peter Sloan, the spokesperson for the Down Syndrome Association of Australia, said:

Why is the Opposition treating 714,156 Australians like second class citizens? People with disabilities are finding it just as difficult as retirees to support themselves on the pension.

The Director of Queensland Advocacy Incorporated, Kevin Cocks, said:

While age pensioners deserve attention and focus, the opposition’s failure to include disability support pensioners in their plan at best suggests this is cynical policy on the run; at worst a fundamental lack of compassion.

The President of People with Disability Australia, Robert Farley, said on 22 September, ‘People with a disability are very much the forgotten people in this proposal.’ And the list goes on. Nicole Lawder, CEO of the Deafness Forum of Australia, said:

The disability support pension is the main source of income for people with a hearing loss who receive a Centrelink benefit. So this review is of a vital concern to those who are deaf or have a hearing impairment—

our review! She continued:

Deafness Forum is very disappointed with proposals for legislation that excludes DSP and carers.

Joan Hughes, CEO of Carers of Australia, said:

People on carer payments and disability support pensions are equally affected by the rising cost of living and are equally deserving of relief.

It is not acceptable to say you will consider these groups at some unspecified time down the track. Their need is immediate. I have a letter from one of the many people who write to me about the plight of disability support pensioners. It says:

I am receiving an invalid pension due to chronic emphysema. Normally I don’t complain but it’s come to the stage where I can no longer live a quality life. After paying my bills such as rent, electricity, gas and phone, and hire fees on my washing machine and fridge, I have a mere $90 a week to live on.

It is not enough, I suggest to the opposition. I do not dispute that the opposition is interested in the aged. I am not going to have a debate about that. I am sure all of the members of parliament care about the aged. But it is not enough to care. That is a condition precedent to improving the plight of not just the age pensioner but all pensioners. You have to be effective.

In the world where I come from, everyone could get up and make a promise to people. But the people who really matter are those who can deliver on the promise to people who do the hard work. I suggest that the coalition’s propositions are stopgaps. They are makeshift contrivances which lack the long-term interests of the people who are hardest up in society—not just the age pensioners but all these other groups. Why on earth are we having a competition between different groups of pensioners on who receives the coalition’s love and attention? I would suggest that all these groups—as will happen with the Harmer review, and the commitment of the Rudd government and Minister Jenny Macklin—get the benefit.

I would like to leave the last word to Belinda Epstein-Frisch, spokesperson for Family Advocacy, who said on 20 September this year:

The opposition’s concern for the plight of age pensioners is a strategy designed to demonstrate compassion for people on Struggle Street. If this concern was real, people dependent on the disability support pension would also be within their sight.

Regretfully, the coalition is merely contriving, acting and distorting rather than taking the best interests of all Australians into account.

Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is quite extraordinary to witness the evolving narrative that has been attached to Labor’s plans for pensioners. It almost beggars belief that we hear a certain speech from the Labor members on a continual basis. The alcopops tax was all about solving teenage binge drinking, and now the narrative is all about blowing a $6 billion hole in a budget surplus. Where has the concern gone for the teenage binge drinking? It has gone to the same place the concern has gone for the age, service and widowed pensioners. I will tell you where the concern is: it is nowhere, because they had the opportunity to change this and they chose not to.

I will explain why they have chosen not to. I had a media release come into my electorate from Jenny Macklin MP, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. In that press release the minister talks about how many pensioners in the Riverina are being ignored by me. She says: ‘By contrast, this fortnight the Australian government will pay all age pensioners, carers, veterans and disability pensioners’—and she goes on to say she delivers coalition policy. Then she says: ‘On top of the regular pension, the indexation increase will mean this’—coalition policy, Minister. Then she goes on with a prize statement. She says: ‘That’s because Mr Turnbull and Mrs Hull are more interested in a political quick fix which will exclude two million pensioners around Australia from a pension increase.’ Surprise, surprise, Minister. The minister has denied more than three million people an increase. She has denied everybody an increase.

In fact, I have sitting right here beside me the member for Gippsland. When the member for Gippsland was running for election, Labor actually decided to show up. They did not show up for Lyons and they did not show up for Mayo, but they did show up for Gippsland. The candidate ran a very strong campaign on pensioners’ issues. It was a very caring and strong campaign because he cares about the pensioners, the disability benefit recipients and all of those people in the electorate of Gippsland. Yet there was a six percent swing against the Labor Party on this very strong issue. So let us say that the Labor Party have most certainly let down pensioners right across Australia.

The minister’s press release says, ‘By contrast, the government understand that all pensioners in Riverina are under financial pressure.’ They understand it but will do nothing to help. This minister, Jenny Macklin, has failed dismally in two cases. She failed when Treasury put the documents before the cabinet of which she was a part—which costed exactly the same proposal and policy that the coalition has put in here. She failed to stand up for the pensioners and say, ‘Yes, give them $30 per week as single pensioners’—exactly the same policy. She failed once in her own cabinet. She failed a second time, in this House yesterday, when she failed every pensioner in Australia. She may accuse me of failing some of the pensioners in my electorate, but she has failed every pensioner in Australia.

We have seen the audacity of this media release, from a minister, delivering all coalition policy and quoting coalition policy. We had this little interlude here of ‘mean and tricky’. How mean and tricky can one get? Going to an election, like Mr Rudd did, saying, ‘We’re going to make life better for you all, we’re going to fix this problem and pensioners are going to be better off under the Rudd government’—that is mean and tricky. When you then skip over to the United States of America and announce millions and millions of dollars that could have gone into this pension increase to get people out of this problem in the short term, it has nothing to do with a strategy.

The previous member said, ‘The Labor strategy is this,’ and, ‘The Labor strategy is that,’ but Labor do not have a strategy. They have a review and then they will have another review and another committee and another consultation— (Time expired)

Annette Ellis (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Earlier this year, the member for McPherson said on a radio program that there should be an immediate increase to the pension. An hour later on the same radio program the then shadow Treasurer, who is now the Leader of the Opposition, contradicted her, saying that it was not in fact the opposition’s policy at all. I have the transcript here and I could quote from it, but I think others have already quoted from it, and time is short. I want to move on.

Earlier this month the former Leader of the Opposition announced the proposal for the increase to the single pension in a speech in Queensland. Less than two weeks after this—last Monday—the private member’s bill was tabled. On the same day, they suggested raising the taper rates on single pensions. On the Sunday before this, the Leader of the Opposition proposed to include single service and widow B pensioners, during a television interview—in fact, I think that was when that announcement was made.

So we have the situation where one day it is an increase to the single aged pension, the next it is an adjustment to taper rates and on another day it is an increase in the single service pension and for widow B pensioners. I ask: what could possibly be next? It is inconsistent, it is policy on the run and, sadly, it is playing with pensioners’ expectations. It is playing with people’s lives out there as this crazy debate being run by the opposition is continued.

Like previous opposition policy in this area, this MPI is bringing us to the point where we can discuss the inadequacies and anomalies that are created by this opposition’s mad policy. And I will say why I call it mad: it is mad because, as other speakers have said, it is ignoring those 700,000-plus people on disability support pension. It is ignoring those 133,000-plus people who are on carer payment. But it has carefully included 700 widow B pensioners. You should include them, but why include 700 widow B pensioners and exclude nearly a million recipients of DSP or carer payment, not to mention the many couple pensioners that will be missing out on this? The opposition have also used a figure from the DVA website of 70,000 to 71,000 people that they want to include in their proposal. But that figure is wrong because it does not represent accurately what their bill describes.

I have to say that I am getting a little bit angry about this. I have sat here day in and day out—and again today through this MPI and question time—being accused of things as a member of this government. We are being told that we do not care. We are being told that we are doing nothing. We are being told that we voted against a $30 increase and therefore we are immoral members of the parliament. We are being told that we are refusing to help pensioners. Let us look at a little bit of the reality before all this excitement gets us carried away. We have an income support system in this country that has evolved over decades and decades. It is very complicated. The interactions and interconnections between all of those different payments are very relevant to this debate. We are sincerely concerned with the level of income that many of these people are asked to live on day to day—the carer payment, the disability pensioners, the elderly single pensioners, the elderly couple pensioners and all of the connotations that are contained in there. We are concerned about it. To say we are doing nothing is just such an outright untruth that it is disgraceful politics.

I notice that the member for Greenway, the member for McPherson and the member for Riverina are, sadly, now not in here. They are probably out there writing their misleading, spinning press releases and again maligning this government and what the truth of this debate really is. The truth of it is that a pensioner who is paying government rent would lose 25 per cent of that $30 straightaway on their rent. A person on an age pension, and who happens to be in a nursing home, would lose 85 per cent of that $30 immediately, because that is the structure for paying rent or living costs if you are in a facility care situation. I have not heard anyone from the opposition explain how that will work. I have not heard one person opposite explain to me how any of the people I am referring to actually get $30. They do not get it; they lose a proportion of it. The opposition are playing a game of ignorance against the reality of the situation. They are accusing us of untruths. Sadly, and I think worst of all, they are playing with people and their lives purely to make a political point, and I condemn them for it. (Time expired)

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The discussion is now concluded.