Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition have said again and again in this House that this budget is based on a concocted budget emergency, and this was very ably set out by the member for Parramatta in her adjournment speech. In my electorate, it will hit the most disadvantaged the hardest. The changes to Medicare, Newstart, family tax benefits, university degrees and to the disability support pension are just a few of the deeply unfair cuts that this government is pursuing. Tonight, I would like to focus on how this budget will impact the most disadvantaged in our local communities, especially young people.

There are many great many programs that provide vital support in the community for people who need it the most and many of these programs are facing the axe. One such program that is facing losing its federal government funding is Reclink, a South Melbourne based organisation that annually provides over 100,000 sporting and cultural activities for people suffering from mental health problems, homelessness, substance abuse, disability, language barriers and financial difficulties. These programs foster self-confidence, bring people out of isolation, develop skills, get people back into work and establish connections and friendships. Reclink will lose its entire $560,000 federal support. This contribution leveraged millions of dollars in private philanthropy and volunteer work. I hope the whole program does not fall over and I will be working very hard with Reclink to see that their invaluable activities are continued.

Community programs that are specifically designed to help disadvantaged children in our society are also being cut. The five adventure playgrounds in St Kilda, Prahran, Fitzroy, Kensington and South Melbourne are set to lose $2.7 million federal funding over the next three years. The first adventure playground was established in 1978 in South Melbourne. The aim of it was to provide children who came from disadvantaged backgrounds with a safe and creative space to play and learn. Many of the children that these playgrounds were designed for lived in high-rise public housing without a backyard, and did not have access to the kind of community networks that these places foster. In a very real sense, these playgrounds became the backyard for these children.

When my kids were little, I used to take them down to the St Kilda Adventure Playground, and I really admired all of the funding from the Port Phillip council, all of the volunteers and the other contributions that were made to get these adventure playgrounds working. And of course they were leveraged off the federal government's support.

Adventure playgrounds offer programs specifically designed for kids between five and 12 years of age. One such program that is run at the Skinners Adventure Playground in South Melbourne is a breakfast club. The children in the surrounding public housing rely on this breakfast. The program includes a bus that takes them to the Port Melbourne Primary School. All of the other schools in their area are full, and they rely on this bus to take them to school, without which there is an obvious disincentive to a cohort of students less likely to attend: no bus, no Reclink, no ability to get from an area where they have no schools to an area where there is at least a school.

To add to all of this, we know how important it is for our children to be not just socially but also physically active, and of course we have all of the stories about childhood obesity. It is plain to see how invaluable the programs and the space that adventure playgrounds offer are to the children who come from families facing economic or social disadvantage. Nick Hearnshaw, Vicar of St Luke's Anglican Church in South Melbourne, has stated that he is very concerned about these cuts and the impact that they will have on the children, their families and the wider community.

I and all of those in the opposition believe that all Australians, regardless of their background, should be given the same opportunities, especially our children. The coalition clearly does not hold to the same principle. The government is insisting on trampling over the most disadvantaged in our community, insisting that we all need to share the burden of its budget. Are the most disadvantaged children meant to be sharing this burden too? As the previous speaker for the opposition stated, it is all based on an entirely false premise—a concocted budget deficit that does not exist. The average person on a single income of $250,000 will, because of this budget, have a tax increase of $1,492, composed of a deficit tax, fuel excise increase, and increased health costs. For a person on $95,000 combined family income with two kids it is $4,931, and that is composed of family tax benefit cuts, GP tax, fuel excise increase and cuts to the schoolkids bonus. But a person on $13,273 who is unemployed and 26 years old will have $6,944 extra tax— (Time expired)