Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I anticipated that these amendments would not get strong support from the government or the coalition but I would like people to bear in mind that—as I articulated earlier—unfortunately, due to the financial crisis there are going to be many more people in these unfortunate circumstances and affected by this legislation. There are going to be many more people that will potentially require hardship provisions.

In the past, the coalition’s approach seems to have been that there are a lot of people who are purposely unemployed and not willing to look for a job. As I understand this legislation, it is about re-engagement and encouraging people back into the workforce, not about blaming people. We believe that not only the hardship provisions but also being able to work off no-show, no-pay penalties are consistent with the government’s approach of re-engagement and would be an added benefit to this legislation to help people re-engage with the workforce. As I said, it is consistent with the government’s stated approach and the way they want this particular piece of legislation to operate. However, I am disappointed that neither the government nor the coalition will accept these amendments.

Question negatived

I move Greens amendment (12) on sheet 5655 revised 2:

(12)  Schedule 1, item 1, page 12 (after line 22), after section 42N, insert:

42NA Comprehensive compliance assessment

        (1)    Before the Secretary determines that a person has committed a serious failure under section 42M, the Secretary must conduct a comprehensive compliance assessment in relation to the person.

        (2)    The comprehensive compliance assessment must assess the following:

             (a)    the reasons why the person may have committed failures under this Division;

             (b)    the reasons why the person may have failed to meet other requirements under the social security law;

             (c)    whether the person has any barriers to employment;

             (d)    whether the person’s participation requirements are appropriate.

This amendment relates to comprehensive compliance assessments. It implements the government’s stated policy intention in respect of comprehensive compliance assessments, CCAs. We support the CCA process, as I have articulated. But, as I also said in the second reading debate, we believe the detail should be in the legislation. It provides more certainty for participants. Part of the problem with the previous system was that a lot of it was either in instruments or in contracts with Job Network providers. We believe that is an inappropriate way to implement this process and we believe that it is important that the provisions have a legislative base.