Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bills before the House are one of the most savage attacks on the Australian safety net in living memory and, without a doubt, the most savage attack so far by this ruthless government on the Australian safety net since they have been elected. These bills are the classic Abbott playbook of double-dealing. It is sneaky and dishonest attempt to fundamentally recast the Australian social contract. This worthless government is attempting to stampede helter-skelter harsh and unprecedented cuts to Australia's family payments, income support and pension system. This is an unparliamentary assault on millions of Australians by this worthless government intent on ripping away money from low- and middle-income earners, young job seekers and senior Australians. And wrapped in this package of cuts and broken promises is the government's ruthless and dishonest attack on pensioners which, in some sort of attempt at peak absurdity, is now before both this chamber and the Senate.

Today Labor will vote against $11 billion worth of cuts. We will vote against these cuts because these changes, like the rest of the budget, undermine people's opportunities to be part of a living community. The changes in this bill take little account of the true need of millions of Australians. These changes further diminish the chance for dignity and for Australian's to participate equally in our country. These changes reduce people to a below-standard income when they have been overtaken by unemployment, illness, disability, veterans' service or indeed age. But the real shame of these changes is the loss of hope they provide people, and it is frightening.

There are people in this country who currently have no money to fall back on, and these changes hurt them; there are many people in this country with the stress of rent, and these changes hurt them; there are parents who, as we speak, cannot afford to give their kids some dollars each week for a birthday present for a friend's party, or for a school excursion, or for the right to participate in musical lessons or sports carnivals; and, even worse, there are children who know not to ask their parents for money because their parents cannot supply it, and these changes hurt their hope. This government is adding to the despair of a great many Australians and it should hang its head in shame.

Let's look at the changes they are making. They are abolishing family tax benefit B for families with children over the age of six years. Where did they say that before the last election? They are leaving young people with no income support for six months. Where did they say that before the election? They are shifting young people from Newstart allowance to the lower youth allowance, leaving them $2½ thousand a year worse off. They have abolished the senior supplement. In question time, we saw this pathetic excuse for a Prime Minister trying to pretend that abolishing the senior supplement was no big deal. It leaves seniors nearly $900 a year worse off. They have got rid of the pensioner education supplement; they have bulleted the education entry payment; they are freezing family tax benefits for two years; they are reducing family tax benefit end-of-year supplements and ceasing indexation; they are applying an interest charge for certain student debts; and they are replacing student start-up scholarships with income contingent loans. Labor will vote against these measures and Labor will vote against the government's cuts to the pension.

Joe Hockey said there are many hard days in opposition. What he is right about is this: it is always a hard day every day we listen to this government lie about cutting pensions. It is always hard for the true believers in this country to have a proper safety net when these people opposite and their worthless ministers say they are not touching the pension and that the pension goes up every six months. What a pack of disreputable twisters they are! We know, and they know, that the rate of indexation is being cut. No wonder the Tasmanian MP is leaving. Look what they are doing to Tasmania—no hope and no chance. Run away and run out of here—the electorate will still find you.

On the day before the 2013 election, Tony Abbott promised there would be no cuts to pensions and no changes to pensions. These bills are irrefutable proof that Tony Abbott's word is not worth the paper it is written on. The verdict is in, the evidence has been found and the smoking gun is here: this government has broken its promise on pensions. After lying to pensioners in order to get elected, the Prime Minister wants to cut seniors concessions; he wants to abolish the senior supplement; he wants to cut pensions; he wants to freeze superannuation; he wants to give Australia the world's oldest retirement age; and he wants to punish senior Australians with a petrol tax, a GP tax, new costs for pathology tests and new costs for diagnostic imaging. This chap who would be Prime Minister does not even know the changes that he is making—you know you are in trouble when you know less about the health system than the health minister! His own budget papers—the document that dare not speak its name—show that $450 million is coming out of the pockets of Australia's pensioners in the first four years alone. That is $450 million that will be taken off pensioners. I bet they are high-fiving each other over in the blue-carpet land. It is a good day's work done when they can do over the pensioners! Anyway, they think pensioners are leaners, don't they?

According to the Parliamentary Budget Office, the cut to the age pension will be almost $7 billion per year 10 years from now. This Australian Council of Social Services has estimated that Tony Abbott's pension cuts will cost pensioners $80 per week within 10 years. That is more than $4,000 ripped out of the pockets and purses of our most vulnerable Australians. What has happened to the once so-called small 'l' Liberal Party? There is nothing more extinct in Australia than a small 'l' Liberal. They should hand back the name 'Liberal' and instead be called the 'Radical Conservative Party of Australia', because that is what they are. They are the extreme right wing—the Tea Party. They are going to cut the age pension; they are going to cut carer payment recipients. Disability support pensioners and the veterans get a whack on the way through by this mob.

It is bad enough that we have a Treasurer who thinks that poor people do not drive cars, but it is even worse, in fact, that the Prime Minister thinks that they should have to pay for his broken promises—his unscrupulous desire to say and do anything to win power and then forget the promises he made. Today, Labor disagrees most sincerely with this government's propositions. Labor dissents from the vision of this country—the bleak and sterile vision—that those opposite would give Australia. We have fought these pension cuts. We have had a few victories—haven't we, member for Menzies?—and we will continue to fight them.

There was some trifle moment in the parliamentary debate when there was pause given yesterday to reflect that it was Gough Whitlam who first recognised the need to link pension levels to the growing standards and costs of living within the broader Australian community. Whitlam was right then, and Labor is right now. We will stand by Australians who have worked hard their whole life, paid taxes their whole life, made a contribution, built our communities and raised their children. We will stand by these people. We will fight for their right to a secure and dignified retirement.

Let us be clear: the age pension is not a king's ransom or a windfall going to the so-called leaners in Australian society. It is a most modest sum. I would like to see some of the people opposite live on it. Let us be clear: the pension is a post-retirement income support payment. It is not a family payment or a subsidy or a supplement that helps with other costs. For millions of Australian pensioners, it represents their entire household income. The mob opposite, with such rank disrespect for the political word and promises they made, would cut the indexation rate. Then, in the height of arrogance, they come to parliament every question time and lie about lying.

Gough Whitlam recognised this fundamental principle in the 1970s. He announced a commitment to maintain a pension rate at 25 per cent of average weekly earnings. Gough Whitlam's vision was for an Australia where all aged people can live in comfort and dignity. Whitlam recognised that the government have a responsibility to help pensioners keep up with the cost of living, but the government disagree. This recalcitrant, conservative and extreme right-wing mob only have one plan for Australia's retirees: to push pensioners below the poverty line. They think that pensioners do not drive cars. They think that pensioners should have to pay more for their medicines and to go to the GP. They think that pensioners should pay more for the diagnostic imaging which may well help prolong their lives. They think that pensioners do not deserve the modest concessions they receive. They certainly do not think that pensioners deserve the security and certainty of a fair pension.

After 12 long years of neglect under the previous conservative government, it took another Labor government in 2009 to increase this benchmark to 27.7 per cent of male total average weekly earnings and to introduce a new pensioner and beneficiary living cost index. We sit for every question time. When confronted with these facts, the Prime Minister constantly says, 'I'm doing pensioners a favour,' and he is cutting their indexation. I hope the Prime Minister keeps lying to himself and keeps misleading the parliament on what he is doing, because the Australian electorate can work him out. They knew 12 months ago that they had doubts about him. Twelve months on, those doubts have been confirmed.

We have inequality in our society and it is being compounded by the failure of the Abbott government to create opportunities for the overwhelming number of our lower income, fixed income and middle-income Australians. Now the government are undoing the good work we did and they are lying about it. This is the Prime Minister who is used to making excuses for lying. He actually said, 'Don't listen to what I say; make sure you get it in writing.' This is the letter he gave in writing to Australians. This is a letter to pensioners—

Mr Hunt interjecting—

Greg, do not say anything; you might learn something. This letter to pensioners is lying about pension cuts. It proves that what he writes is as worthless as what he says. I will repeat that: this letter to pensioners lies about the pension cuts and proves that what he writes is as worthless as what he promises in an election. One point two million dollars of taxpayer money for a letter is not worth the paper it is printed on. What an extraordinary display of contempt for Australian pensioners and Australian taxpayers from this slippery Prime Minister.

Let me say again for the people of Australia: the Abbott government are cutting the pension and now they are trying to gag debate on the future of the Australian safety net. They want to drop the guillotine on bills that threaten the decency and generosity of Australian society. We will oppose these pension cuts, where 3.7 million pensioners will be up to $80 a week worse off within 10 years. The Parliamentary Budget Office has confirmed this fact. Regarding the veterans' pension, the government make me frustrated beyond all belief when they talk about their love of the flag and their love of veterans. It only extends as far as a parade, a salute and an RSL function. When it comes to actually standing up for veterans, that is a different issue. These are patriots to the very superficial level that we see. A $65 million cut to war pensions is little service or recompense from this government.

The Department of Veterans' Affairs currently provides 140,000 service pensions and 84,000 war widow/widower pensions. All of these people will be up to $80 a week worse off within 10 years. Then look at the deeming rates. They are not content with going after the full pensioners; they have also had enough time in their busy diary to go after part-pensioners too. Part-pensioners face a double hit through reductions in their part-pensions because of the government's plan to reduce the deeming rates. As a result, if a pensioner has some shares or a small fixed term deposit in a bank, they will be punished by further reductions in their part pension.

We have the world's oldest retirement age. This, again, goes back to the out-of-touch nature of this arrogant government. Increasing the pension age—

Mr Hunt interjecting—

The member for Flinders. The worst sort of workplace injury he will ever suffer is a paper cut, yet he wants everyone else to work to 70. Increasing the pension age to 70 is an attack on the Australians who do the real heavy lifting. We on this side of the House know the real Australians who do the real work. Many of us have spent our working life representing tradespeople, labourers, cleaners, nurses and others who make a living with their skilled hands, strong minds and strong backs. Many Australians started work at 15, not playing in Liberal student politics until they had to finish.

It is disgraceful that this government wants to force Australians to work until they are 70. Look at the mob sitting opposite trying to interject pathetically. They want you to work until you are 70, but they have not thought about how to lift workers compensation beyond 65. The usual Liberal, no idea. I think Alicia Silverstone would play Greg Hunt in the movie of 'Clueless'!

At the same time, they are freezing superannuation, abolishing the low-income superannuation contribution, undermining the ability—

Mr Hunt interjecting—

I love this mob opposite. They will give a tax holiday to people who have over $2 million in their superannuation retirement, and they will introduce a new tax on 3½ million Australians who earn less than $37,000 a year. We could not have written this script. We could not have believed they would be so mean-spirited, but there they are at again.

We believe that Australia should have the world's best retirement savings system not the world's oldest retirement age. They do not know anything about pensioners' cost of living, otherwise they would not have axed the $1.3 billion in funding for seniors concessions, money which assisted seniors and pensioners for electricity and water bills.

Look at Greg Hunt over there. He says he is a great man on bills. I tell you what, you have taken away—

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Flinders—thank you.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I request that the opposition leader refer to members by their titles.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. I was going to call him the Minister for the Environment, but no-one would believe that, but I thank you for your direction. They have taken away from electricity and water bills, transport costs and council rates. All Australians will pay $7 extra every time they go to the doctor.

Mr Hunt interjecting—

Member for Flinders, we will talk about what you have done right up to the next election, don't you worry about that.

When we learn about this GP tax, we learn more about the hidden costs of this GP tax—and the more we learn, the worse it gets. This will probably be useful for our Prime Minister if someone could send this transcript to him—he did not have a clue about diagnostic imaging today. Medicare provides around 23 million diagnostic imaging and pathology services. The Australian Diagnostic Imaging Association estimates that the GP tax will reduce funding to these services by $188 million in 2015-16—it is a 10 per cent cut, Prime Minister—and rebates for general patients who were previously bulk-billed for pathology tests and imaging due to the abolition of the bulk-billing incentive from 1 July next year. The abolition of the greatest permissible gap safety net, a safety net which moderates the cost of high cost items, has gone too.

As a consequence of the GP tax, some patients will be forced to fork out hundreds if not thousands of dollars up-front to pay for MRI, X-rays, CAT scans and mammograms. This will apply to many cancer patients and to holders of low-income healthcare and pensioner concession cards. They are ripping out $1.3 billion of the pockets of Australians by increasing the cost of medicine.

Then there is the family tax benefit B changes. I thought these people opposite said that they were the great friends of families. Heaven forbid. Please, do not be our friends in future! Just stay right away! More than 700,000 single income and single parent families are going to lose their family tax benefit B over three years as a result of this savage mugging by the Abbott government just because their youngest child turned six. Because of Tony Abbott, a single income family on $65,000 with two children aged eight and 14 is going to lose over $6,000 per year by 2016. These payments help families struggling to make ends meet keep up with the cost of living. As John Howard said when he heard about this raid on family tax benefit B: 'Family tax benefit B are not welfare payments. They are just a recognition through the tax payment system of the undeniable fact, as all of us in the room have been parents know, that it costs money to have children.' I do not often agree with the former Prime Minister, but even a stop clock can be right twice a day!

Then we look at their attack on young job seekers.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's an original one.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you still here? Under Tony Abbott's budget, more than 100,000 young people under 30 who are looking for a job will be forced to wait six months before receiving any income support. Labor have said that the changes to Newstart are perhaps the single most heartless measure in a very ugly, brutal budget, sentencing young people to a potentially endless cycle of poverty when they should be getting a hand to find a job. It is just a blame-shifting, cost-shifting measure that puts the price of unemployment on to the unemployed and their families.

The human rights committee chaired by Liberal Senator Dean Smith agrees. They have concluded that Mr Abbott's proposed six-month Newstart waiting period for people under 30 'breaches the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living'. Labor have clearly and consistently called this policy for what it is. It is a vicious, victim-blaming measure that does nothing to address youth unemployment or the challenges of finding work at a time when youth unemployment has soared to 13.4 per cent, around double the national average. Now is not the time for the Abbott government to turn its back on young Australians.

We know in this place, the Prime Minister's literary propaganda aside, that reducing pensions and attacking the poor and vulnerable does not help this country grow. It is long overdue in this country that we have a debate that the link between a more equal society and economic growth is inextricable and it is true. This is a government who talk about growth yet they would create greater inequality in our society. You cannot have fair dinkum, sustainable growth unless you have measures which create more equality in our society. I say it again: if the Liberals want to go after the pensioners, the vulnerable and the families, they are going to have to come through Labor.

We say to the government today: you have drawn the battlelines for the next election. Labor have always pioneered advances in social services. We have always believed in the betterment of the people and we have been most interested in the great welfare of the middle-class, the lower income people, fixed income people and the most vulnerable in our society.

The current Liberal Party does not deserve the name 'Liberal'. At the next election Australians will be asked to choose between a party that protects the pension and a party that cuts it, between a party that stands up for families and a party that forgets them, between a movement that will always fight for them and a Prime Minister who lied to gain their vote at the last election.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Leader of the Opposition knows he should not use those words. I request him to withdraw.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw, and the Prime Minister who passed himself off at the last election in return for your vote undertook to do one thing and he has broken that contract and done something else.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I requested the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did withdraw.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise. I did not hear you.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But it has not changed what I just said in terms of this Prime Minister, who passed himself off at the last election as promising to do one thing and instead, after the election, did exactly the opposite. But that is okay, Prime Minister. We say to the Prime Minister about his unfair changes in this bill, not today, not tomorrow, not ever. Australians want to know that they are part of a society which values all of its citizens. Australians want a society which includes the homeless, includes the unemployed, includes the lonely and includes our older Australians. Australians do not want a government that would weaken and break the relationship between any of our individuals and communities in which they live. Australians do not want policies which add to the insecurity, add to the misery and add to the want of many Australians.

There is a clear choice and that is the contest. I promise the government that Labor is up for this fight. We will fight you changes. We will defeat your changes and at the next election there will be a reckoning between you and the Australian people.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak about the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Student Measures) Bill 2014. This bill seeks to encourage students who have been inadvertently overpaid while on various government payments—including Austudy payment, fares allowance, youth allowance for full-time students and apprentices, and ABSTUDY living allowance—to enter into an arrangement to repay their debt and to act in a responsible manner. The way this bill seeks to encourage people to do the right thing is to make those who are repaying their debt, or have at least made an arrangement with the Department of Human Services to pay their debt at some time, exempt for the imposition of interest to that debt.

This bill does not set out to apply interest to each and every cent owed to the government by students who have been overpaid. This bill applies to the small percentage of people who finish their studies and either stop making automatic repayments through the social security system or those who have made no attempt to meet their obligation under the act to repay overpayments in a timely fashion according to their ability to do so.

While discussing this bill with my staff I found that two of them had been affected by an overpayment at least once during their studies at university, but both repaid their debt by paying a small amount from their regular Centrelink payment. Surely this is not too much to expect and not too difficult to organise. Both staff members told me it took just one phone call to make the arrangement and it was a set-and-forget payment. The government took $10 per fortnight from their usual payment to repay the debt.

All this bill proposes is that students take responsibility for their obligations. We hear a lot about rights these days but with rights come responsibilities. In this country it is your responsibility to repay the government if you receive money from the taxpayers to which you were not entitled. Taxpayers are very generous to students in Australia. They pay for the majority of their tuition costs and only expect a modest repayment of just four per cent and then only when a student's income reaches more than $53,000 per year. As well as that, the taxpayer provides most students with a living allowance called Austudy, youth allowance or ABSTUDY which does not have to be paid back at all. If you are on the highest rate of Austudy payment as a single parent, that amounts to more than $14,000 per year. In return all the taxpayer asks is that students who are overpaid respect the support they are being given by the social security system and repay their debt.

I should like to point out to students that their bank will never be as generous when it comes to money they owe the bank, and that lesson is best learnt now by being a responsible member of the society that has supported them. For those few who continue to shirk their responsibility, their debt will be subject to an interest charge which is the same rate as applied to all debts owed to the Australian Taxation Office, the 90-day bank accepted bill rate plus an additional seven per cent, which is currently around 10 per cent. So I encourage students who have been overpaid to do the right thing—pick up the phone and make a payment arrangement and avoid any interest charges.

These moves were first proposed by the now opposition during their chaotic stint in government in the 2012-13 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook and the 2013-14 budget, but were removed when the budget passed in March 2014. Accordingly, we should expect the full co-operation of those opposite in supporting a slightly amended version of their own policy. However, given their current track record of rejecting common sense decisions, it would appear as though common sense is in short supply on the other side of the chamber, even though it was their proposal in the first place.

In order for students with Centrelink debts to have time to make a payment arrangement with the Department of Human Services, the application of interest to a debt will not start until 1 January 2015. The quicker this bill passes both houses and is signed into law, the more time students will have to make arrangements before interest is applied. I therefore call on the opposition to support this bill to ensure a quick passage for the sake of the students.

This bill also makes changes to the Student Start-up Scholarship by making the scholarship a repayable loan. The $1,025 loan is totally voluntary and is available twice a year at the start of each semester to help with the cost of books, stationery, laboratory fees and other equipment which students need to successfully complete their studies. This loan is similar to the old Student Financial Supplement Scheme except in one very big way. There is no requirement for a student to trade in 50 per cent of their Austudy payment in order to access these loans

Those students on the Student Financial Support Scheme used to have to repay the full amount of their loan including 50 per cent of their Austudy money, and it had to be repaid at the same time as HECS-HELP was being repaid. So a student who has an outstanding HELP and SFSS debt and earns $1,025 a week has to repay six per cent of their income to cover their debt.

However, under this new scheme, no repayments for the student start-up loan will have to be made until after the student or former student has repaid the HELP debt in its entirety. In this case, courtesy of our taxpayers, the students are getting a pretty good deal—a low-interest, long-term loan in order to ensure students have their tuition heavily discounted, their educational needs met as well as a living allowance.

For the 2014-15 tax year, this financial year, if a student earns less than $53,345 per annum, they are not obligated to make any repayments on HELP or SFSS. Interestingly, after the member for Lilley became Treasurer, what was the income a student had to earn before beginning to repay their student debt? I will tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker: it was just $39,825 per annum. This government, the coalition government, is giving students an extra $13,520 in earnings before they have to begin to repay their debt. While the Labor Party continue to oppose their own advice on the restructuring of the higher education sector, they stand damned by their own track record of being harder on students than the coalition government is.

In summary, the coalition has increased spending in the higher education sector in actual dollar terms. The coalition is the highest spending government on education in Australian history. With this bill, all we are seeking to do is make students responsible for their obligations to the taxpayers who generously support them and provide a level of support to students so that they can continue their studies to go on to become vital members of our society. I support this bill.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, here we are again to debate some of the government's harshest budget cuts—cuts that will leave millions of Australian families worse off; cuts that will leave many, many young people destitute; and cuts that will see the standard of living of Australian seniors attacked. This is not the first time that these matters have been debated in this House. Indeed, not one of the measures in these three bills has not been through the House before. You might ask, 'Well, why is this?' It is because, thanks to Labor, the government has not been able to get any of these cruel cuts through the Senate. Each of these measures has already been rejected by the parliament, and I can assure each and every Australian listening that we intend to do everything in our power to reject them again.

These three pieces of legislation are a direct attack on ordinary Australians, an attack on the fair go in this country. We should not allow this government to get away with it. It is not only the cruelty of this budget that has Australians so offside; what has also got people offside is the sheer incompetence of how the government has gone about it.

Just today, again we see the Minister for Social Services in TheGuardian making a very frank admission that the government cannot get these cruel cuts through the parliament. Even so, here we are debating these savage measures, and the government is clearly determined tonight to ram them through, even though the government must know that it does not have the numbers in the Senate and it certainly must have heard from the Australian parliament that the Australian people think that these measures stink.

The minister told TheGuardian today that he would consider any reasonable offer from the crossbench to salvage his cruel cuts—a frank admission from the minister himself that he is fresh out of ideas about how he is going to get this legislation through the parliament. I will be telling the minister loud and clear tonight that there is only one reasonable offer that will come from the Labor Party, and that is one I will offer him right now: he needs to dump this cruel budget, and dump it once and for all.

The first of these bills, the Social Services and Other Legislation (Seniors Supplement) Bill, seeks to abolish the seniors supplement. When before the last election did any of the Liberals or Nationals opposite tell the 300,000 seniors in this country that they were going to have their almost $900 a year supplement axed completely? When did they tell them this before the last election? Of course this measure also goes to 29,000 veterans. All of these people have worked hard all of their lives. They do not deserve to be punished by this government for their hard work. For many of these people, this payment is critical to help them with their bills and other rising cost-of-living pressures. Yet on 24 June this year this Prime Minister said that this payment was a cash splash. That is the disrespect and disregard that this Prime Minister has for senior Australians.

On other legislation, of course, the government is proposing to slash the indexation arrangements of the pension. This will see $23 billion—that is how much it is; it has been announced by the Treasurer that this is how much will come out of the pockets of pensioners by 2023. And it will see pensioners left $80 a week worse off within ten years of the change, according to the Australians Council of Social Services. This is despite the Prime Minister coming in here day after day denying that he is cutting the pension, denying that it is a broken promise—even though he said the day before the last election there would be no changes to the pension. No wonder pensioners are angry. And they are angry: it does not matter where I go around Australia, pensioners are angry—angry at having their very modest retirements cut. They also extraordinarily angry that the Prime minister stood there the day before the last election, looked them in the eye and said there would be no cuts, no changes to their pension.

Labor are out there campaigning against these cuts—and the Council on the Ageing are out there talking with pensioners and seniors across the country—and making sure that we do everything we possibly can to stop this cut to the pension. As the Leader of the Opposition mentioned just a few moments ago, we saw the Prime Minister stoop to an extraordinary low just last week, writing a misleading letter to Australia's 2.3 million pensioners—and spending $1.2 million of taxpayers' money for the privilege. Of course, he did not tell the truth in the letter. He did not tell pensioners that he is in fact going to cut the indexation of their pension.

The bills that we are debating tonight are a full-scale attack on the living standards of Australian families. In these bills we see the most extraordinary cuts to family benefits and parenting payments—and they are being slashed at the same time the government is proposing a new GP tax and a new fuel tax. These bills tonight contain billions of dollars of cuts to families. I will just go through a few of them. Nearly $2 billion will be cut from family tax benefits as a result of a freeze to the rates of family payments for two years. Nearly $2 billion is going to come out of the pockets of low- and middle-income families. According to the Department of Social Services, a freeze to the low-income free area for family tax benefit part A alone—just this one measure—will see 370,000 families around $750 a year worse off in 2016-17. So make sure when you are going to the ballot box at the next election, which will probably be in 2016, that you remind those families that you are taking $750 out of their pockets through that measure alone.

On top of that, another $2 billion is being taken out as a result of the decision to cut family tax benefit part B when the youngest child turns six. This measure alone is going to leave families around $3,000 a year worse off —$3,000 a year. That is what you are taking out of the pockets of these families. This is going to see so many families so much worse off. Unsurprisingly, we have heard very little about that from those opposite. It will be very interesting to see whether any one of those members opposite speaking on these bills tonight tries to defend these extraordinary cuts to families. The Department of Social Services revealed at Senate estimates that, if this legislation gets through the Senate, around 700,000 families will lose their family tax benefit part B when their youngest child turns six. So which one of you is going to front up to your single income, single parent families and tell them that they are going to lose $3,000 when their youngest child turns six? I can assure you that we will be fighting this all the way.

These bills will also see a billion dollars cut from end of year supplements. These bills will put more and more pressure on the lowest income families in this country. We have seen the analysis from NATSEM which found that around 1.2 million families will be on average $3,000 a year worse off. In contrast, the top 20 per cent of households will have either no impact or a negligible positive impact. That is the attitude of this government—so arrogant and so out of touch. It does not care that millions of Australians are going to be worse off because of these savage cuts.

We saw today the analysis from NATSEM on the hardest hit electorates. For example, in the electorate of Watson and the electorate of Blaxland, both in Sydney, the average household is going to have to give up $990 each year; whereas, in the Prime Minister's electorate, families will only be worse off by $144 a year. This is no fluke; this is what this conservative government is all about—looking after those at the top end of town and whacking those who are not so well off. This analysis from NATSEM—described by the Prime Minister as `Australia's most respected modelling outfit'—shows that the hardest hit people in the country are those who are already doing it tough. They should be told by this government that, as a result of these bills, the poorest people in Australia must shoulder the burden of the Prime Minister's cuts. In contrast, Labor will stand up for low- and middle-income families who will be so savagely hit by the cuts in this legislation.

But perhaps, as I have said a number of times, the cruellest measures in these bills are the Prime Minister's brutal attacks on young job seekers. These bills will see young people under 30 who are looking for a job forced to wait six months before receiving any income support—and in some cases they will have to wait even longer. So the government is saying to young people, 'You are on your own.' If after six months without income support the young person has not found a job, the measure will require them to go on Work for the Dole. And if after their time on Work for the Dole they have still not found a job they will lose their payments for another six months. What do those opposite think these people are going to live on? Where are they going to get their food from? Who is going to pay the rent?

Every single Australian that you talk to understands how harsh these measures are and what it is going to mean when you push these hundreds of thousands of young people into poverty, crisis and homelessness. In fact, the budget actually includes money for emergency assistance, because the government knows that these young people will have absolutely nothing. I can make it very, very clear to the government that we will not be supporting this measure. It is cruel, it is harsh, and we will not support it at all.

The government are out there trying to suggest that there may be room for a compromise. They do not have it in the legislation, of course. Tonight we are debating the same proposal that has been around for the last six months. The government want to see young people with nothing to live on for six months. I want to make it very clear: there will be no compromise. We will not be providing any support for any compromise by the government that might suggest people should have nothing to live on for a month or some other period that the government might pull out of their hat.

Also as a result of this legislation the government want to push young people under 25 onto the lower Youth Allowance. Once again this is a huge cut—$2,500 a year. We will not support this punitive measure. How on earth does the government think these young people are going to survive on these considerably reduced levels of support? How is it fair to say to a young person, 'You're going to lose 20 per cent of your income support, whereas somebody on $200,000 will pay around 0.2 per cent through a reduction in their income. That is why Australians understand that this budget is grossly unfair. They look at the reality of these bills—of who will pay the price. The price will be paid by the poorest Australians. It will be paid by those families who are doing it the toughest.

For months, Labor have been campaigning against this government's savage budget. We will continue to stand side by side with pensioners, with young people, with families. Our message to them is: we will continue to stand with you and we will vote against these savage cuts. We will continue to fight this cruel budget every day from now until the next election.

Debate interrupted.