Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition supports this piece of government legislation, the Tax Laws Amendment (Gifts) Bill 2015. It is an important piece of legislation for a number of reasons. It provides deductible gift recipient status to two organisations, the International Jewish Relief Fund Limited and the National Apology Foundation Ltd. I will speak briefly about the International Jewish Relief Fund, which is a good organisation that was established to help impoverished Jewish people struggling in communities around the world—wherever they might be—and strengthening the Jewish community's response to humanitarian crises and disasters. It has been registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission since 2013; it is currently up-to-date with all that is required in reporting to that agency. Its admission to the status of deductible gift recipient should be supported by the House and in the other place. It is a good organisation doing good work, and it does so with the best wishes of the opposition and the House.

I want to focus today on the National Apology Foundation Ltd, which is also receiving deductible gift recipient status in this House. The National Apology Foundation is an organisation founded by former Prime Minister Rudd in order to further the works that were begun on the day of the national apology to the stolen generations. That, of course, was one of the most important days in the history of this chamber. Prime Minister Rudd stood at that dispatch box and righted a wrong by apologising the activities of the past which had so egregiously affected so many worthy Australians. It was an important moment. First Australians, First Fleeters and all of us who followed are writing the next chapter in our nation's story together. Former Prime Minister Rudd said in his final address to the House—when he announced his retirement from the House—that he hoped that the apology had achieved 'some healing of the soul'. It was clearly not only very important to Kevin Rudd but also very important to the House and to the nation—a very important moment in our history.

I remember sitting at my then ministerial place at the end of the first row for the national apology. It was a very moving moment and a very important moment as Indigenous people filled the galleries and then rose as one. There were thousands of Indigenous people on the lawns in front of Parliament House and others who gathered throughout the country to watch the first time a prime minister had stood on behalf of the nation to apologise for the wrongs of the past.

It was said at the time by some that it was an entirely symbolic gesture. I do acknowledge that there was a risk that it could have been a symbolic day where no concrete steps were taken to deal with Indigenous disadvantage. That was something that the then Prime Minister and the government were acutely aware of; and I am pleased and proud to say that it was not a symbolic day. It was a day in which an important apology was delivered but also a day on which the House, the government and the nation committed themselves to do much more. It was the first time that the government had committed, in a formal sense and a coherent and strategic sense, to Closing the Gap.

It was the first time in many senses that those words, 'closing the gap', had been uttered on behalf a government: a commitment to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage. We would not accept the premise that the apology was a one-day event to be forgotten; rather it would be used as an opportunity to focus government and national attention on the scourge of Indigenous disadvantage, which continues and which must be dealt with. The former government was committed, and former Prime Minister Rudd announced a strategy to be developed and implemented through COAG, with our state and territory colleagues, and with an annual report from the Prime Minister to the parliament on progress. To their great credit all of Prime Minister Rudd successors—Prime Minister Gillard and Prime Minister Abbott have fulfilled that mandate and that task and have reported to the House on progress. I am sure Prime Minister Turnbull will continue in the same vein.

Since leaving parliament, former Prime Minister Rudd has formed the National Apology Foundation, a not-for-profit foundation with five core purposes: to perpetuate the spirit and substance of the national apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples for future generations once the events of 2008 fade from national memory; to sustain the bipartisan support the apology has so far received into the future—and it has received bipartisan support; I clearly remember that then Leader of the Opposition Brendan Nelson standing at the dispatch box at outlining his strong support for the apology. A third purpose is to monitor progress in Closing the Gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, as outlined in the 2008 statement. This, to my way of thinking, is the most important element of the foundation's work, and I will return to that point. Another purpose is to support Closing the Gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in education by raising funds and contributing those funds to existing non-government institutions engaged in this mission; and the final purpose is to support where possible and appropriate, Indigenous peoples internationally in their efforts to achieve reconciliation in their own countries—which is a worthy goal as well.

Of course, Kevin Rudd and Therese Rein have donated $100,000 to start the foundation. I am sure every member of the House will want to join me in acknowledging that and thanking them for their generosity and their contribution. They are not simply engaging in words;$100,000 is a very substantial contribution will—they are putting their money where their mouth is, as the old saying goes—and it is a very good start for the foundation. The foundation has important work to do because it is fair to say that progress on Closing the Gap has been patchy. There has been some very good work, but there is a long way to go. For example, it is a very good thing that between 2007 and 2012 the life expectancy of the average Indigenous male increased by 1.6 years and for the average Indigenous female by 0.6 years or just over six months. That is a good thing, but there is still a long way to go. It is unacceptable to all of us that the gap in life expectancy for Indigenous Australians is 10 years less than for non-Indigenous Australians. If your crime is to be born Indigenous, you will live for 10 years less. That is not acceptable to this House; that is not acceptable to this parliament or this nation. It must be dealt with.

There has been some progress, and we cannot expect overnight progress on what is a generational challenge. The Closing the Gap strategy has concentrated on practical measures like reducing smoking rates—there has been some modest progress there—and improvements to maternal health and to childhood health, making a difference in the early years which will have such an impact on life expectancy. I am not going to make partisan political points in this address, but the Indigenous smoking strategy of the previous government which has been abolished by the current government needs to be reinstated. I simply make that point, and of course we will have more to say about that in the very near future. Smoking rates are above 40 per cent for Indigenous Australians when the average rate for non-Indigenous Australians is less than half that, in the teens, and we have an aim to get it to 10 per cent. To have Indigenous smoking rates of more than 40 per cent is a huge factor in the lesser life expectancy of Indigenous Australians.

The last Closing the Gap report brought down by former Prime Minister Abbott was sobering reading. He said, and they are worthy words:

… in many areas progress has been far too slow. It is profoundly disappointing that most Closing the Gap targets are not on track to be met.

Former Prime Minister Abbott was right about that. It is appropriate, therefore, that the foundation will commit itself, in addition to what the government of the day is doing, to better monitoring progress on those targets. Closing the gap in life expectancy within a generation is not on track to be met under current trends. It was hoped that the gap would be closed by 2031, but progress has been too limited to say that that target will be met. Halving the gap of mortality rates for Indigenous children under five within a decade is on track to be met by 2018, and that is something that should be acknowledged and celebrated. Ensuring access for all Indigenous four-year-olds in remote communities to early childhood education was not met. The target was to have that occurring by 2013. In 2013, 85 per cent of Indigenous four-year-olds were enrolled, compared to a target of 95 per cent—so there is more work to do. Closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous school attendance rates within five years is not yet being met. Halving the gap in reading, writing and numeracy achievements for Indigenous students is not on track to be met by 2018. There has been no improvement in Indigenous reading and numeracy rates since 2008. That is not acceptable. Halving the gap of Indigenous Australians aged 20 to 24 in year 12 attainment for equivalent attainment rates is on track and that is, again, a very good thing. Halving the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians is not on track—there was a decline in employment outcomes and since 2008 we have been going backwards.

It is clear that the focus of this House, this government and future governments must remain on closing the gap of Indigenous disadvantage. I note that the Leader of the Opposition made a very significant speech last week on this matter. We have indicated the addition of another goal for the Closing the Gap project, which goes to incarceration rates. That is an important element of Indigenous disadvantage and something a future Shorten Labor government would embrace and implement. There is a vital need for more than just symbolism, as important as that is—it was a necessary first step to have the apology; it was a cleansing moment for the Indigenous community and the broader Australian community and a vital moment in our history but it was not enough. Kevin Rudd knew that at the time, and he is to be commended these years later for standing at the dispatch box opposite and committing his government and future governments to the Closing the Gap strategy, and subsequent governments and prime ministers are to be congratulated for continuing that work. We do have areas of disagreement—there is no point in gilding the lily about those. There are cuts to Indigenous funding which we on this side do not support—we strongly oppose them—but this is not the occasion on which to go through those matters. It is the occasion, however, to welcome the establishment of the National Apology Foundation and support its admission as a deductible gift recipient. That provides tax deductibility for Australians who donate to the foundation, and I encourage many Australians to follow the lead of Kevin and Therese and make substantial donations to it. Prime Minister Rudd said at the Australian National University just a couple of weeks ago, when he formally launched the foundation:

To be blunt, whoever the future government of Australia happens to be, we want to keep the bastards honest. We want to ensure the necessary data is collected to measure our success or failure in bridging the intergenerational gap of entrenched Indigenous disadvantage. This mission must continue beyond the passing seasons that we call politics.

As the alternative government and the future government of Australia, we welcome that scrutiny from former Prime Minister Rudd. It is right of him to say that; I know him well enough to know that he means it. I know him well enough to know that he would provide scrutiny to future governments of any political persuasion if they were not pulling their weight in getting the gap closed. He would hold us to account as he would hold those opposite to account, as he should. It is one of the defining achievements of his prime ministership that such progress was made in the cause of reconciliation. It will continue to be one of the defining elements of his contribution to public life in the different capacities he has now embraced. The work so far is to be acknowledged and celebrated but, most of all, we must acknowledge that we have a long way to go as a nation before we wipe the stain of Indigenous disadvantage from us, that the scourge of Indigenous disadvantage is dealt with and that we can truly say we are proud of how we have dealt with our valued and cherished Indigenous communities, the custodians of the land for 40,000 years who are now properly acknowledged as such but are not properly made equal to us in every respect until the gap of Indigenous disadvantage is dealt with, eliminated and consigned to history.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the shadow Treasurer has outlined, the Tax Laws Amendment (Gifts) Bill 2015 provides statutory listing for two organisations which will receive deductible gift recipient status. This is necessary for the International Jewish Relief Limited organisation because that organisation operates in both developed and developing countries and, therefore, does not meet the criteria of a charity that operates purely in developing countries. It is also necessary for the National Apology Foundation Ltd because that organisation aims to further both program goals and policy goals and, therefore, does not fall within the outlined categories for tax deductible gift recipient status. Tax deductibility will be a boon to these two important organisations, and I am pleased to say that bill enjoys bipartisan support.

Tax deductibility is not the only factor that drives giving. Over recent years we have seen Australians becoming more disconnected. It is a trend that runs from the 1960s through to be mid-2000s, and then we have also seen it from the mid-2000s since. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics finds that the share of Australians with no involvement in social and community groups has risen from 30 per cent in 2006 to 32 per cent in 2010. A report from 2014 by JBWere, titled Australian giving trends—Stuck on the plateau, documents the fact that the share of Australian taxpayers giving to charity has failed to rise in recent years. Indeed, it points out that if you go to the back to the early 1980s around 40 per cent of taxpayers were giving to charity, and now that figure is around 35 per cent.

It is important that we encourage charitable giving. I acknowledge the work of megadonors such as Paul Ramsay, Brian Trudinger and Westpac, and also the important work done as Western Australian governor by Malcolm McCusker in making charitable donation a part of Western Australia's social fabric. We should acknowledge too the work of organisations such as Pro Bono Australia, which has brought giving to the fore. But if we are to boost philanthropy then we need a full-court press. We need all organisations encouraging social capital, encouraging engagement with organisations and encouraging charitable donations.

A recent Philanthropy Australia meeting here in parliament, the inaugural Philanthropy Meets Parliament Summit, focused on a number of ways in which that can be done. Many of the attendees there recognised the value of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. The commission opened its doors in December 2012, ably headed by Susan Pascoe, and I am pleased to say that the government's bill to scrap the charities commission continues to languish on the House Notice Paper. States and territories such as South Australia and the ACT are now working with the charities commission to make it more effective, and I hope that is a path that other states and territories will go down also to make use of the red-tape reduction potential of the charities commission.

But it would be terrific too if the charities commission were able to more strongly advocate for a culture of charitable giving to organisations such as those we are debating in this bill today—the International Jewish Relief Limited and the National Apology Foundation Ltd—but also to the tens of thousands of worthy charities across Australia. A charities commission that was strongly backed by the government is one which could play a more active role in building social capital in Australia.

I urge the government to formally put in the bin their proposal for scrapping the charities commission, an idea which goes back to the former minister, Kevin Andrews, the member for Menzies. Now that the member Menzies has stepped out of the social services portfolio, the idea of scrapping the charities commission ought to be similarly scrapped. That would give the charities commission a greater sense of confidence and it would ensure that there was less staff turnover in the charities commission, which continues to suffer turnover somewhere in the order of 25 per cent per year as a result of the uncertainty that hangs over its head.

The charities commission enjoys very strong support from the sector. Surveys by Pro Bono Australia put support at around four in five charities. An open letter to the Prime Minister supporting the charities commission reads like a who's who of the sector. Many charities have formally called for the charities commission to be maintained. Indeed, it should not just be maintained; it should be strengthened and it should be allowed to play a vital role in rebuilding social capital in an Australia that is increasingly becoming more disconnected.

The religious traditions of giving are those which we remember at this time of year: the Christian tradition of tithing, the Jewish tradition of tzedakah, the Muslim notion of zakat. Many Australians will be, at this time of the year, thinking of those less fortunate than themselves. As patron of this year's Kippax Uniting Church gift drive, I am very proud of the work that the Kippax Uniting Church community do to provide food hampers and gifts to the vulnerable in the Canberra community. These are efforts that are being replicated in different contexts by different organisations across Australia.

Australia's charities do extraordinary work but they need a charities commission backed by the government and empowered to advocate charitable giving and make us a more connected community. I commend the bill to the House.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the members who have contributed to this debate. The Tax Laws Amendment (Gifts) Bill 2015 adds two entities to the deductible gift recipient specific listings in division 30 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, from 1 January 2015.

The first organisation is the National Apology Foundation Ltd, which works to sustain the spirit and the substance of the national apology delivered to Indigenous Australians and to ensure this message is carried on to future generations. The second organisation is International Jewish Relief Limited, which helps impoverished and struggling Jews and strengthens the Jewish response to worldwide humanitarian crises and disasters to communities, regardless of religion and geography.

Obtaining deductible gift recipient status will help these listed entities to attract vital public financial support for their activities, as taxpayers can claim an income tax deduction for certain gifts to deductible gift recipients. I commend this bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.