Senate debates
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Matters of Public Importance
Record Level of Debt
4:18 pm
Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source
We have heard a lot of discussion about the issues around the growing debt and deficit in this country. We do not hear a lot of discussion about the growing social deficit in this country, which is going to be expanded under this budget. We of course have concerns around the deficit, but we also believe that many Australians share with us the view that in tough times we need to invest very carefully in measures that soften the blow to those hardest hit during those tough times, during recession. We agree we need to be investing in building infrastructure that supports our future prosperity and we need to be doing this with well-targeted stimulus measures. However, we are deeply concerned that we are not investing that money in areas that meet the needs of those hardest hit in Australia.
I believe that many Australians share my shock and disappointment with the kinds of measures that were introduced yesterday. The items that Wayne Swan has been running up on our nation’s credit cards are not giving people a fair go and they are increasing the social deficit that we face in this country. This is not a budget that seeks to share the pain by helping out those hardest hit. It does not seek to deliver equity and a fair go during tough times. This is not a budget that seeks to trim back on unnecessary spending and prioritise the investment in important priority areas. It is not a budget with an eye to the future, that invests in measures that tackle the threats to our sustainability and invests in a growing new green economy.
There is not a fair go for single parents and the unemployed, who have been overlooked in this budget. There is not an increased investment in helping our social services to address the growing problem of unmet need and to build their capacity so they can support the growing wave of those who are facing crisis. There will be new people seeking extra support who have become unemployed. We all expect that their numbers, unfortunately, will continue to grow. There are more and more families who will not be able to keep up with their mortgages, will not be able to meet the rising cost of living, and they will be needing emergency relief, financial counselling and emergency accommodation. There will be more stress placed on their relationships and, unfortunately, there may be more mental health episodes. The budget does not address the growing crisis in aged care and it does not address many other areas which I have not got time to go into.
After all the weeks of leaks and prebudget spin, most Australians were expecting a tough budget. Many of us were in fact prepared to share the pain, to dig deep to make sure that the nation was on a steady course and to help those most disadvantaged in our society. What we were not prepared for was to be asked to face a massive deficit so that we could fund further government largesse on tax cuts, a massive boost in defence spending and ever more money for clean coal. This was without a fair go for those most disadvantaged and without sufficient funding for services and support for those most in need.
Many Australians have become very aware of their job security in these uncertain times and are increasingly concerned that they could suddenly, through no fault of their own, find themselves without a job. Right now, the Newstart allowance is $227 per week for singles. Losing your job seems to us like the first step on a slippery slope to poverty. Unfortunately, for many, there is a real risk that they will end up in long-term unemployment, losing skills, motivation and employability—precipitating financial and family crises. Unfortunately, this may end up in their sliding into poverty and despair. Where are the extra jobs and the job ready measures that we were all expecting in this budget?
The Greens have been calling for a long time for a greater investment in social services and community building. The previous government were guilty of squandering the benefits and the opportunities of the good times and failing to invest in those measures that build a truly sustainable social infrastructure. They undermined the sustainability of our community services, pushed through unjust and unfair Welfare to Work measures and contributed to a growing gap between the haves and the have-nots.
I refer to the report that was released by the Australian Council of Social Services in looking at the winners and losers from the pension increases and the measures that we believe are going to create a growing social deficit in this country. The Greens of course welcome the increase to the single age pension. We have campaigned on that issue for many years. However, we think it is despicable for the government to pick only some pensioners to be winners. To leave out single parents—300,000 single parents—and their 600,000 children is unconscionable. If it is unacceptable for a single age pensioner to try to survive on $285 a week, it is unacceptable for single parents to try to raise their children on less than that. It is unacceptable for those on Newstart to try to exist on $227 per week. If age pensioners cannot meet their budget requirements, how can single parents and how can those on Newstart?
I did some simple calculations the night before last, looking at what a single parent on a pension gets with family tax benefit A and B. It is $123 less than the minimum wage—and, of course, the minimum wage does not include that family’s access to family tax A and B. Those families on the minimum wage struggle to survive. I ask again: how does this government expect single parents to survive and bring up their children outside of poverty on less than the minimum wage? It would seem that this government have reversed the Hawke mantra of ‘no child shall live in poverty by 1990’. It seems to us that their mantra is now ‘the children of single parents will all be living in poverty by 2020’.
It is unacceptable that a budget deficit of this size does not deliver for all those most disadvantaged in our community. It will take us many years to claw back the budget deficit. How long will it take us to recover from the looming social deficit that this budget will create, where the government clearly picks winners and losers? Of course, this impacts not only on those families who are not getting this support, who have to deal with the issues of sliding into poverty and existing in poverty, but also on our community. It breaks down community resilience and cohesion. It results in anger in communities and the building of fences and walls between the haves and the have-nots. It does not create a cohesive society that we in Australia value so much. Those divisions will get wider. Those divisions will not be repaired unless we give those most disadvantaged in our community the support they need and give them a fair go.
I will acknowledge that the previous government started differentiating single parents with their punitive Welfare to Work regime, which put single parents on a lower income on Newstart than they had when they were on parenting payment single. But, instead of redressing that outrageous measure, this government continues that demonisation. Is that why we are picking on single parents? Is it because we want to demonise them? Are they somehow undeserving of government support? Are those on Newstart suddenly undeserving of government support? This is not only a social deficit issue; looking after the unemployed and single parents and their children—so their children are not being raised in poverty—is an economic investment as well, because we all know the implications of poverty on— (Time expired)
No comments