Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to be speaking on the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 3) Bill 2021, which implements a number of minor Treasury law amendments and budget measures. I foreshadow that Labor will be supporting the bill. I also understand that there'll be a second reading amendment moved by the member for Indi. I've had the benefit of having a look at that amendment, and it makes a lot of sense. I foreshadow that Labor members will be supporting that amendment as well.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you sure?

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. The member for Lingiari is often hard to get over the line on this one, but I think party solidarity will get us there! As I was saying, the bill deals with a number of minor Treasury law amendments, most of them pretty straightforward. I'll go through and speak to each of the five schedules.

Schedule 1 increases the low-income threshold for the Medicare levy, changing the thresholds in line with changes to the consumer price index. This is obviously necessary to ensure that that income threshold keeps pace with cost-of-living increases, with a modest increase this year of some $400 that is nonetheless meaningful over the longer term. The changes cut across single households, pensioners, families and students and will keep the Medicare levy payment thresholds in line with inflation. We'll be supporting that.

Schedule 2 expands the objective of the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation Act 2018, otherwise known and hereafter referred to as NHFIC, to allow NHFIC to assist eligible single parents with dependants. The stated purpose of this measure is to allow the government to implement its policies in relation to support for single parents entering the housing market. It's a modest proposal, and we're going to support it. But we don't for one moment pretend this is going to be a solution for the housing problem affecting Australia at large. On our assessment, this will benefit single mums—I think about 10,000 of them; there are about 100,000 mothers who fit the category—who are currently earning a salary somewhere between $80,000 and $120,000 a year, not rich by any stretch of the imagination if they've got a family that they're supporting. But I think all fair-mined people would have to acknowledge that it is a relatively small proportion of single mums who are seeking a housing solution who will be benefited by this. It's not a reason to oppose it, but it is a reason to say that we actually need to do a lot more than this.

Look at the problem that we have with homelessness and the problem that we have with housing affordability. Anybody who has been going to housing auctions in the last few months will have seen, week after week, young couples turning up only to have their hearts broken, as the house that they had their hearts set on purchasing will have sold for prices 10, 20, 30, 40 and sometimes even as much as 50 per cent above the indicative price. I was talking to a staff member—not of my office, but of this place—in recent weeks. They said a house they went to bid on went for over $100,000 above the advertised price, and this is not an isolated incident. Our great concern is that most of the policies that are emanating from this place, and from other parliaments as well, are actually making the problem worse, not better. They're putting more fuel on the fire and not doing anything with the supply side of things and not doing anything to level the playing field.

It's why we were vehement in our opposition to a proposition that was being peddled by some members opposite to raid superannuation to make payments to purchase a house. The problem with a policy like that is that it hurts somebody twice. It robs them of retirement savings, but it also means that that one-off and sustained effect will push housing prices up immeasurably. We don't need a crystal ball to work that out. We only need to talk to real estate agents around the country and ask them, 'What is the net impact of schemes like the HomeBuilder scheme on auction and housing prices around the country?' They'll all say: 'Well, it's great for us. Our commissions are bigger because the housing market is booming and the housing prices are going up. We love it. We're big advocates for it. We're the No. 1 fans, because it means as house prices go up our commissions go up.' And house prices are certainly going up: six per cent last month alone and a forecast for 10 per cent this year and another 10 per cent next year. That's a 20 per cent increase in a little under 18 months. As house prices go up, commissions go up—bully for them. I make no criticism of real estate agents, that's their business, but it does nothing to assist with housing affordability. In fact, it makes the problem worse.

It's why the member for Grayndler, the leader of the Labor Party, made the centrepiece of his budget-in-reply address housing and our housing affordability measure. It's not the whole answer, it's a part of it, and there will be more to come. But it is important to acknowledge that there is a group within our country for whom—due to whatever circumstances—private home ownership is either not currently within their grasp and not likely to be currently within their grasp or private home ownership is never likely to be within their grasp—because of income or other reasons. We can't throw these people on the scrap heap; we can't leave these people behind. We have to ensure that there is a housing solution for them, which is why I was so proud that the first instalment of our measure is 30,000 new homes.

And the great thing about that policy announcement is that it's a jobs policy as well. The 1-in-10 rule tells us that one in every 10 workers on a site—which would be funded and working to deliver these 30,000 new homes under Labor's policy—would be an apprentice. And what a damn good thing that is, because we've got a shortage of apprentices. We've actually got less apprentices working and less apprentices in training today than we had in 2013. The population has gone up and workforce has gone up, but apprenticeship numbers have plummeted. That is an indictment on this government playing catch-up. If you're struggling to get a sparky, a plumber or a chippie out to your house, or the prices you are paying seem extraordinary, it's because we've stopped training for a decade. And the lazy solution, which is to just bring people in from overseas—is lazy, indeed—is also robbing our kids of the opportunity to get a trade and get a start in life and perhaps some day start their own business. Which is why this policy, the Labor policy, is superior to what the government is proposing.

We don't oppose this, by the way. If we can help 10,000 single mums into a house—good! It's an important job to do, but it's not job done, which is why our policy goes much further than that, at not a cent to the taxpayer, by the way, which is a point that needs to be made. It's an investment and not a cent to the taxpayer because of the clever way that Labor's policies have been put together.

Schedule 3 of the bill is going to exempt eligible payments made by Australian governments to thalidomide survivors from income tax and social security and veterans entitlements income tax. It was an oversight when the payments were made and a good thing it is being fixed. The use of thalidomide in the 1950s and 1960s was a tragedy, an absolute tragedy. There are still people among us living with the disabilities and deformities that were a result of that failure in public health. So we welcome this provision, which will remove the eligible payments that they receive for the course of their thalidomide injuries from taxation and income tests for payments emanating from this parliament.

Schedule 4 is an interesting one. It is in a similar vein. Schedule 4 provides an income tax exemption for qualifying grants made to primary producers and small businesses affected by the February and March 2021 floods and storms. It's a small measure of assistance for those businesses, and Labor welcomes it, but it does give us the opportunity to make the point, and again remind the government, that they've been damned good at making announcements about these funds but damned lousy at getting the money out the door. There are still households, businesses and enterprises which have been promised lots in relief for bushfires and floods but to whom the money hasn't flowed. They see that the Prime Minister, who wouldn't hold a hose during the crisis, won't hold a pen to sign the cheque that he promised that they were going to get, and that, frankly, is not good enough. So we welcome this provision but remind the Prime Minister that making an announcement is not delivering an outcome. If press releases were going to deliver outcomes to flood- and fire-affected communities, they'd be cock-a-hoop by now, but they're not, because the press release hasn't been followed up by the money that was promised, and that's not good enough. It is too little, too late and not good enough.

I will deal with schedule 5, which includes several new additions to the list of deductible gift recipients under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. It is welcome to see the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom and the Judith Nielson Institute for Journalism and Ideas on the list, because on this side of the House we see the importance of independent journalism and quality journalism free from government interference—an important point. The media serves as a guardian of our democracy. It keeps us all honest in this place. Too often we see the government using, for example, the power of the purse string in relation to the ABC and SBS as a means by which to silence critics within those media organisations or the power of the pulpit to attempt to jawbone and silence critics from other media outlets. To their credit, the majority of journalists don't cower to this sort of pressure, but it doesn't stop those on the other side day after day—they've got glass jaws, and that's the problem. They're always the first on the front foot to go out to level a criticism, but they're the first to grab the box of tissues when somebody levels a criticism at them, and there is no bigger glass jaw in this place than that worn by the Prime Minister. So we welcome the fact that DGR status has been granted to both the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom and the Judith Nielson Institute for Journalism and Ideas. Good, tick. But, if you really want to do something to support independent journalism in this country, get out of the game of revenge politics, punishing the ABC for quality and independent journalism, and stop using the pulpit and the forums available to you to badger, harass and discredit those who write articles about us which from time to time we might find uncomfortable. That's the best thing you could do for quality journalism in this country.

I also note that the Andy Thomas Space Foundation has been granted DGR status. For those in this place who don't know, Andy Thomas is an Australian hero. He was our first Australian astronaut, selected by NASA in 1992 to become a member of the Astronaut Corps. During his four space flights, he spent over 177 days in space. If you think being in lockdown during COVID was a restriction on your movement, just picture 177 days in a small capsule, floating outside the orbit of Earth. But what a contribution he made, undertaking vital scientific experiments, visiting the Russian Space Station, Mir, before it was deorbited, back in 1999. A foundation set up in his honour is a good thing, and listing it, as a recognition of the importance of the space industry and space science to Australia's future, is a great thing. It enjoys our support. Hear, hear!

The Great Synagogue Foundation is another new entry on the DGR list. They preserve the historic Great Synagogue in Sydney. It's a cornerstone of Australian Jewish history and the community in Sydney and more broadly in New South Wales. It should be supported. Another important Jewish institution, the Sydney Chevra Kadisha, has been listed. This is the organisation which provides assistance, financial and otherwise, for funeral arrangements for Sydney's Jewish community. I also want to welcome the listing of the RAS Foundation, which is a charity supporting regional and agricultural communities, as well as Youthsafe, a charity providing training and support for young persons' safety.

These are all worthy of DGR listing. Of course, there's a long list of other organisations that seem to always miss the government's list, and we'd call on the government, the next time it has the opportunity to bring one of these Treasury laws amendments bills before the House, to be a bit more balanced in the organisations that it brings forward. We support each and every one of these, but we'd like to see more worthy organisations added to the list. With those comments made, and a pre-emptive congratulatory message to the member for Indi for her excellent second reading amendment, which I've had the benefit of perusing, I commend both the legislation and the amendment to the House.

Katie Allen (Higgins, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 3) Bill 2021. This bill contains diverse amendments which are important to everyday Australians. These amendments may sound small individually, but let me assure you that, together, these amendments will deliver some really important outcomes for countless Australians. They address issues as diverse as ensuring affordable and accessible health care, ensuring women can more easily access affordable housing, and helping right the wrongs of those who have suffered from medical injustices in the past.

The Morrison government's commitment to providing accessible and affordable health care to all Australians is unwavering. That's why schedule 1 in this bill seeks to increase the Medicare levy low-income thresholds for singles, families, seniors and pensioners for the 2020-21 income year and future income years, in line with movements in the consumer price index. Doing this will ensure that low-income households who did not pay the Medicare levy in 2019-20 generally will not begin to pay for it in 2020-21, if their income has increased in line with or below the consumer price index. The Medicare levy low-income thresholds ensure the people who pay no personal income tax because of the tax-free threshold and structural offsets, such as the low-income tax offset or the seniors and pensioners tax offset, generally do not incur the Medicare levy.

We all know Medicare has never been stronger than under the Morrison government and never more than for those who do not have the financial means to pay for out-of-pocket costs. That is why I'm proud that this government continues to invest in Medicare bulk-billing and, as a result, GP bulk-billing rates have continued to rise to record highs. Last year, 89.3 per cent of all GP visits were bulk-billed—that is to say, almost nine out of 10 visits to the GP were provided with no out-of-pocket costs to the patient. As I said, Medicare has never been stronger than under this government. We've seen that through last year with COVID and we see that again this year. I'm proud that the changes made by this bill will help ensure that those on low or no incomes will continue to be able to access the healthcare they need, where and when they need it.

This bill is not only about ensuring we protect the incomes of singles, families, seniors and pensioners but also about making changes to ensure women's long-term safety and economic security. This is a fundamental priority for the Morrison government. Indeed, our approach is underpinned by the values of dignity, respect, equality and justice. As part of the budget handed down a fortnight ago, we're investing $3.4 billion in new measures to improve outcomes for women to rectify the significant gender divide that is an everyday reality for Australian women and girls. Fundamental in our response is the Family Home Guarantee, which is aimed at single parents with dependents to build a new home or purchase an existing home with a deposit as little as two per cent. This important amendment in this legislation recognises that the home is instrumental in providing a strong foundation for social, emotional and economic wellbeing. Everyone deserves a safe place to call home. By offering a helping hand to single parents, the vast majority of whom are women, and their children, we can give families the best possible start to life. Regardless of whether the parent is a first homebuyer or previously owned a home, eligible single parents can apply after 1 July this year for one of the 10,000 Family Home Guarantees which will be made available over the next four consecutive financial years. As a result, we are providing for those who have previously been locked out of the housing market, struggling as a single parent to save enough for a deposit while paying rent and often starting their lives anew if they've been through marriage breakdown. In conjunction with the Morrison government's cabinet women's task force and a host of other initiatives, this is just one way, albeit a very important one, we are creating further opportunities for women to fulfil their potential. There has never been a stronger voice for women in an Australian government than there is now.

The bill before us today also recognises the plight of victims of thalidomide, acknowledging the grave suffering caused by circumstances beyond their control that have resulted in a lifetime of pain and hardship. As a former paediatrician, I have seen the plight of thalidomide sufferers. It has been a dreadful period in the history of medicine. Thalidomide was said to relieve everything from anxiety to morning sickness for pregnant women. But what led to what is now undoubtedly known as history's greatest pharmaceutical scandal, through no fault of their own and unknowingly, mothers consumed this drug, resulting in approximately 10,000 babies born with severe defects in the 1950s and 1960s. I acknowledge that the fight for justice from survivors and their families has been too long and too hard; therefore, I welcome the national apology that will take place later this year that recognises the plight of victims of thalidomide and understands they have suffered from circumstances beyond their control, resulting in a lifetime of pain and hardship. I also welcome the construction of a site of national recognition for thalidomide survivors and their families. This is another important step in acknowledging the suffering experienced following this medical disaster. The Morrison government is taking further action in recognition of Australia's thalidomide survivors who have suffered so terribly. The 2021 budget measure includes payments to survivors in recognition of their suffering and increased cost of living due to disability, with the annual payments due to commence in the first half of the next financial year. The government is also providing ongoing support in the form of the Health Care Assistance Fund and the Extraordinary Assistance Fund to support survivors with healthcare costs and daily living expenses. Of course, further additional support is also being provided through funding other relevant services, such as the NDIS. These actions, I know, will be welcomed by the families and friends of thalidomide survivors as well as, of course, by survivors themselves.

I'd now like to turn to schedule 4 of this bill, which acknowledges the devastating impact on several communities across Australia of the most recent fires, floods and storms that have devastated properties and livelihoods. One of the changes within this bill is to qualifying grants. These grants are activated as a category D measure under the joint Commonwealth-state Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements 2018. They include small business recovery grants of up to $50,000 and primary producer recovery grants of up to $75,000. These grants can be life-changing to those flood and storm affected communities. We know that, following COVID, so many people have dealt with so much, and it can be easy to forget that there are so many communities around Australia that are rebuilding after what was an incredibly difficult period of their lives. The Morrison government understands small business. It understands that small businesses are the lifeblood of the economy, and the amendments in this bill ensure that the government continues to support and continually reassess the needs of disaster affected communities as they continue in their recovery. More information regarding these grants and other disaster assistance measures is available on the Disaster Assist website, and I encourage all affected Australians to access this website or contact their local member of parliament.

The final schedule of this bill, schedule 5, amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to expand the list of not-for-profits to benefit from tax deductable gift status. The list will now include, amongst others, very worthy organisations that support Australians, including Youthsafe, the Judith Neilson Institute for Journalism and Ideas and the Trustee for the Great Synagogue Foundation. The drafting of redistribution boundaries sees a welcome change for me in the population mix of the electorate of Higgins. If confirmed in July, and despite objections from Labor, including from the member for McNamara, the Jewish population in my electorate will rise from around three per cent to up to 12 per cent. As a committed supporter of Israel, I really welcome this redistribution, and I do hope that the community will support the redistribution going through. The organisations that will benefit from the changes in this legislation—in addition to the ones I've named, there are five more—will find that tax deductions will be applied to donations of $2 or more.

I'm particularly pleased about the benefits that will flow from this new listing to the Centre for Entrepreneurial Research and Innovation. The Centre for Entrepreneurial Research and Innovation, CERI, is a registered charity that aims to work with universities and research institutes to promote entrepreneurialism and the commercialisation of research and innovative ideas. CERI is a social enterprise for start-ups. It's focused on the people behind innovation. As an incubator, its programs have been designed to educate and empower early-stage entrepreneurs, PhD students and visionaries. Through education, mentorship, industry exposure and access to an extensive network of experts and like minded people, their mission is to enable the leaders and industries of the future. I have been to many cities in Australia and I'm very pleased that there are many incubator organisations like this that are flourishing across Australia. These sorts of programs are going to be important to our future, so I really am encouraged by the fact that the CERI program includes: a female founders network; customer development masterclasses, which will help to define the customer value proposition for new start-ups; and a CEO-in-residence program.

As Australia emerges from COVID, these programs are more important than ever to ensure we emerge as a smarter, not just stronger, economy. Innovation was seen through COVID. Who can forget the word of 2020 'pivot'? But now we need to capitalise on our ability to pivot. We are, after all, a country of enormous resilience and enormous resourcefulness. But we need to capitalise on the emerging capability as a country, and I welcome supporting organisations like CERI to enable that capability right across Australia.

In summary, this bill before us is diverse in its amendments but united in its intentions. Those intentions are the care and responsibility of helping change the lives of those less fortunate Australians for the better. It's about enabling others. It's about helping ensure the government is there for the people of Australia in their time of need—that government is not just by the people; it's for the people. I am proud of these proposed amendments and I commend this bill to the House.

Jason Clare (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 3) Bill 2021. I specifically want to talk about the Family Home Guarantee, which is part of schedule 2 of this bill. The Labor Party support this, but we support it like you would support a bucket of water in a drought: we'll take it, but it's not enough to fix the problem. It's not enough to make a really big difference. It's not enough to fix the housing affordability problem that we all know exists in this country.

There are one million single-parent families right across Australia, and a lot of them could do with this sort of help to buy a home. According to this legislation, this help will be provided to 10,000 single-parent families over four years—in other words, roughly 2,500 a year over four years. That's what the government's press release says. That's what Budget Paper No. 2 says. It's also what the explanatory memorandum to this bill says. It says, 'Up to 10,000 guarantees expected to be issued.' My question to the government, to the minister who's introduced the legislation, is: Is that it? Is 10,000 a hard cap? What if more than 10,000 people want to access this scheme? Will they be able to or not? It's not clear from this legislation whether they would be turned away.

The First Home Loan Deposit Scheme Guarantee has a hard cap. This is modelled on that scheme. Will this be a hard cap as well? If it is and if there are more single-parent families who want to access this scheme to buy a home, then they'll miss out, or at least their chances of buying a home will be delayed for another year or another year after that—and there are a million of them. Single-parent families do need a leg-up, a bit of extra help, to buy a home. I think we all get that. It's universally supported by members of this House. If there are a million of them in Australia, if this scheme is only going to help 2,500 a year over the next four years, a lot are going to miss out.

There's another group of Aussies who need help and who don't get help out of this scheme as well. Think about single-parent families where there are no dependent kids. I'm talking about single-parent families where the kids have left home. They might have gone to university, Mum and Dad might have got divorced or the family may have broken up for whatever reason. The fastest-growing group of homeless Aussies at the moment are older women, aged 65-74—people my mum's age or my aunty's age. I think we all know people in that sort of situation. When they get divorced and they split the assets, often it is the case that a lot of women don't have enough money to buy a house again and end up renting for the rest of their life and living on the pension. If you're renting and living off the pension, that's a recipe for poverty. This scheme doesn't do anything to help them.

If this scheme is going to help single parents, then it's also really important that they get the price cap right that this scheme will operate under. The legislation allows people to get access to this guarantee as long as they buy a home under a certain price. To get access to the scheme, you have to buy a house that's less than a certain level—and that's fair enough. You want to make sure that you're helping people on modest incomes. You want to make sure that you're helping people who are buying the sort of home that they can afford. But you also want to make sure that there are homes for them to buy. That's the critical thing. And the problem is, at least from what we've seen in Launceston recently, that there aren't.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.