David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Human Services. Will the minister outline to the House the importance of compliance measures to ensure the integrity of the welfare system? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches that undermine the integrity of the system?

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Banks for his question. Welfare compliance measures are critical to ensure that people get the right payments—no more and no less. We do this by crosschecking the income information that a person self-reports to Centrelink with the income information that the Australian Taxation Office has on file. When there is a discrepancy we ask the person to explain it. This work is so important because the unfortunate reality is that some people deliberately defraud the system while many others inadvertently fail to properly update their income information. When that occurs people are getting more than they are entitled to. Our system identifies such people and seeks to recover that money for the benefit of the taxpayer.

I would like to give the parliament some examples of such cases. A South Australian man was on benefits for all of the financial year 2011-12 to 2012-13. He reported $7,000 to Centrelink but the tax office showed that he actually earnt $65,000. I have another example. A Victorian woman, who was on payments from 2010 to 2013, reported $23,000 to Centrelink and the tax office said she earnt $69,000. The final example I will provide is the best one. A Queensland gentleman was on payments from 2011-12 to 2012-13. He said he earnt $5,000 during that period of time but he actually earnt over $100,000. I do not know if you have picked up the years in which these cases occurred, but they all happened during the Labor years when the member for Sydney was the human services minister, when the member for McMahon was the human services minister and when the member for Gorton was the human services minister. None of those ministers picked up those cases, but we are doing the hard work of picking up those cases.

I am asked about alternative approaches. The Labor Party have been very clear about what they would do if they were back in government. The member for Barton, the shadow minister, has said very clearly: 'Here is what we would do. Labor would do exactly what they did in the past.' That is what she said. Well, in the past they ignored all of those cases, and now they are promising to do exactly the same again on egregious cases which they did not pick up. The Labor Party are effectively saying: 'Don't worry; it's someone else's money. Come in and help yourself. We won't do the checks.' That is what they did in the past and that is what they would do in the future if they were back in government.

The member for McMahon wants to be the Treasurer in the future. He disregarded these egregious cases. Should he be Treasurer, he will do exactly the same thing again and disregard taxpayers' money. (Time expired)