Senate debates
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
Business
Suspension of Standing Orders
4:35 pm
Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source
This is a vexed issue. In March of this year, I was part of the process that negotiated changes to the youth allowance eligibility criteria to, in effect, resolve a deadlock between the government and the opposition. Before that deadlock was resolved, there was considerable uncertainty about student start-up scholarships and relocation scholarships, and potentially it would affect many tens of thousands of students. Here we are in the last two weeks of the sitting calendar discussing this particular motion about the suspension of standing orders to decide whether, in effect, there should be not only a suspension of standing orders but a suspension of the process in terms of having a Senate inquiry into this.
I appreciate that the government’s bill went through an extensive inquiry process, and we all knew following the compromise reached between the government and the opposition that the new scheme would commence on 1 January 2011. So the issues of concern raised by Senator Nash are matters that have been previously raised. I do not for one moment question the sincerity and genuineness of Senator Nash in relation to this issue, but I think it would be fair to say that no new evidence has been presented since this matter was last debated and the compromise was reached between the opposition and the government that would warrant the suspension of the practices of the Senate. The best way of dealing with this matter is not to suspend those practices but to have it referred for an inquiry.
Having said that, I have had discussions with the minister about specific concerns put to me about potential anomalies with the classifications and boundaries caused by the instrument that has been used. In particular, I appreciate very much the conversation I had with Richard Vickery, the president of the South East Local Government Association in South Australia, earlier today about some of these potential anomalies. For instance a student on one side of the street in Mount Gambier is classified as outer regional, while their neighbour on the other side of the street is classified as inner regional. We are talking about a matter of metres and yet the classification criteria are quite different.
I have had discussions with the minister in relation to this and I can say—and I am sure if I am wrong that the minister will correct me—that the minister has agreed to examine whether the use of the Australian Standard Geographical Classification, the ASGC, is the most appropriate mechanism for determining eligibility for the independent youth allowance. I believe that the best way of resolving this in the longer term is to have that review and to have this bill get the scrutiny it deserves because it is a bill that is important. It is a bill deserving of scrutiny and there are budgetary considerations in relation to it. That is the best way forward, and such a committee ought to report back in the first week of February.
This is not an ideal situation, but given what occurred earlier this year I think that this is the fairest way forward.
Question put:
That the motion (Senator Nash’s) be agreed to.
No comments