Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Social Services. Will the minister update the House on the government's reforms to create a fairer welfare system that supports people into work?

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question and acknowledge that he has a deep interest and has done much research into this area. Last night's budget contains a range of amendments to Australia's welfare system. What we are seeking to do is make the system simpler. We are looking to consolidate seven working age payments into one to simplify the system. We are looking to redraft the mutual obligation rules so that there is a consistent system of participation. We want to make the system of mutual obligation fairer, remove inconsistencies and get rid of gaps inside the system that create passive welfare dependence. We are also looking to completely redesign the entire system of compliance to ensure that we have a compliance system that is clear, that is understandable, that ensures that we are helping the people who need help and that ensures that those people who are not doing the right thing and who are gaming the system are not able to continually game the system.

The reason we would hope that members opposite might remain at least a little open-minded to some of the propositions with respect to this system of welfare reform is that there are very deep issues and problems in the system that need fixing. Looking briefly at compliance, there are about 100,000 people who persistently fail to comply with the basic requirements of mutual obligation. We think about half of those are people who genuinely need help, and we need to identify them sooner. The other half are persistently failing to comply, without any real penalties being instituted in the system. Due to the good research of the Minister for Human Services, we can say that we have been unable to find a single person last year who suffered a financial penalty for a failure in job search—not a single person. Seven thousand jobseekers went through a two-week pay series consistently failing to engage, engaged on the last day and got back paid. Three thousand one hundred of that group did it six times in a year. It may surprise some members opposite—indeed, it may surprise many Australians—to know that the mutual obligations that are placed on you in your 20s are completely different than the mutual obligations that are placed on you in your 30s—50 hours a week activity in your 20s; 30 hours a week in your 30s. It may surprise all of us here that there is nothing in the system that requires a 55-year-old Australian to actually search for work when they are receiving Newstart. These are the things that we propose should be fixed. We want to fix them by redrafting the system, but also with very substantial investment: $47 million will be spent reactivating people; $263 million will be spent in helping young parents engage in the workplace— (Time expired)

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

My question is to the Prime Minister. What is the punishment for the big banks if they pass on his new tax to customers, and is that the point when he will finally see sense and set up the royal commission into the banks that the Australian people are asking him to do?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At this rate, the Leader of the Opposition seems to be competing to become the pin-up boy for barristers rather than Prime Minister of Australia. I mean a royal commission into the banks! What is a royal commission into the banks going to tell us that we do not know? What recommendations is it going to make that we have not implemented? We know what is wrong with banks.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Ms Butler interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my left. The member for Griffith is warned.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know what has gone wrong, and what we are delivering is one major reform after another. Customers and small businesses that have been let down will have a one-stop shop, a financial complaints authority, to go to: where they can get their matters resolved. Bank executives who do the wrong thing will be out. The level of regulation over their bonuses will be such that they will not be able to get all of their pay in one hit. It will be staggered over a period, 40 per cent post-dated and 60 per cent for CEOs, so that if things come out of the woodwork it can be clawed back. What we are doing is taking the recommendations that have been made over many inquiries and many reviews and that we know need to be acted on now.

What the Leader of the Opposition is doing, in his gutlessness and in his pathetic populism, is promising years and years of lawyers. Honestly, it is as though this was a great idea that the member for Isaacs gave him. Many, many lawyers, lots of fees—

An honourable member: Post-political employment.

Yes, post-political employment perhaps for the member for Isaacs. He could retire from parliament and join to become counsel assisting. It would be very lucrative for him. The fact is this: we know what has gone wrong with the banks and we know they have let down their customers. We are putting in place the mechanisms to deal with that. The one-stop shop will be in operation, as recommended by Professor Ramsay. It will go into operation now. We are getting on with it. We are getting on with the reforms to executive remuneration. We are getting on with the reforms to regulation so that executives, senior executives, who do the wrong thing, who do not call out wrongdoing and who do not act on malfeasance will be out of the business. Now that is tough. These are tough measures and we are doing them now. So the honourable member may be more interested in litigation than action but we are interested in protecting Australian consumers and customers of the banks right now.

Can I tell the honourable member—I will let him in on a little secret: the banks are not scared of a royal commission, sunshine. They have got plenty of lawyers and big law firms. What they are concerned about is being held to account, and that is what we have done. (Time expired)