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

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 7271 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2), omit the table item.

(2) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2), omit the table item, substitute:

One of the concerns that many people have expressed to me, and during the Senate committee inquiry into this bill, is the commencement date of 1 January 2013. This is a particularly bad time of year. It is a week after Christmas when all families feel financial strain but in particular those on low incomes feel the strain. More often than not, when they are trying to give their children a Christmas on a very low income, they end up with some debt—hopefully temporary debt—and it is also, of course, when children are at home on school holidays. If a parent does not work in a child-friendly workplace or if they have not been able to get leave during the holidays, they may well have to leave their casual employment to look after their children or they may have to pay for fairly expensive child care. So there are added expenses during that holiday period. I am sure every parent knows that when children are on holiday there is always added expense in terms of their activities. If a parent is on a very low income, more often than not they cannot afford to send them very often to the pictures, and there is always additional expense during school holidays.

So this is the worst time of the year that the government could bring in this change and start dropping people's income. It is rubbing salt in the wound. Not only is the government taking this most extraordinary step of dropping people to a much lower payment when they are trying to support their children, but it is doing it at the most expensive time of the year for families and also the time of the year when there is a bit of festivity around and people are enjoying the summer holidays. They have a lot of expenses, and what does the government do? How do you celebrate the new year? Take a drop in your income by $60 to $100 a week. That is a very significant impact. Not only do you have those holiday period expenses and those Christmas expenses, but you are also preparing for the new school year. You are preparing school uniforms, books, a schoolbag and various other pieces of equipment. So it is at a very expensive time of the year, and proportionally more expensive for families on low incomes. For families that are struggling, the burden and the percentage of the impact is far higher than for families that are not struggling to survive on a low income. So, as I said, this is rubbing salt into the wound.

These two amendments seek to change the commencement date from 1 January to 1 July 2013 so that it is not at the peak expense time for single-income families. We believe this is at least one way you can help single-income families who are now going to be subject to this. I am predicting that the Senate will support the third reading and that therefore this will go through, so what I am seeking to do is to change the commencement date so it is not quite so severe—just a small bit less severe—on those families that are struggling to survive on this low income.

I commend the amendment and again urge senators to consider this and think about the impact. Imagine if you were sitting around on New Year's Day or at Christmas thinking, 'In a week's time I'm going to have less income.' What would you feel like when this very significant proportion of your income is going to disappear and life is going to get that much harder? You are not going to have a very good Christmas, I can tell you, and you are not going to have very good school holidays when this regime comes in.