Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today in support of these two disallowance motions. I rise as the daughter of a veteran who served as a commando on the Kokoda Trail. My father, now almost 92, has carried shrapnel embedded in and scattered throughout his shoulder and back for more than 70 years. I can tell you as his child that those scars that my father carried were not just carried in his back. He gave his youth for the service of Australia. He gave his youth fighting on the Kokoda Trail. So Legacy and the RSL, when I was a child, played a very, very important role in my life.

I go on now to talk about the current situation. I cannot imagine a more callous act from a government than taking such a small amount away from veterans' children. I was fortunate. My father came home from the war and went on to get married and have children, but that legacy of the years that he gave fighting as a soldier for Australia impacted on our family life. I cannot imagine the impact that losing a key loved one would have on a family. My father's injuries had an impact on our lives. When you kiss your loved one goodbye and then they do not come home, because they have given their life for Australia, the impact would be enormous. For the Abbott government to take money from the children of war veterans is absolutely shameful; and it is even more shameful because it is such a small amount of money for the government. But it is a significant amount of money for a family, because it helps with shoes, books or tertiary fees, and it is a tiny, little recognition that the parent's death meant something to the broader Australian community.

Again we have seen a government that simply cannot speak the truth, because last week the Prime Minister told my colleagues in the other place, 'No specific payments to veterans' families are being cut.' We know that is just not true. That is just not true. The Prime Minister can continue on saying, as much as he likes, that he has retained some of these schemes and that he has consulted with stakeholders on this issue. Fortunately for me, my father came home. But the families of mates of my father who did not come home relied on a bonus, a payment from the government, for their lost father; in most cases it was a father. Young Australians who were expecting to have some of their educational expenses met will now have to find the money for uni books or for fees to help fund their education or training out of their own pockets. Again I suspect that Legacy and the RSL will step up, but it is not appropriate for those organisations to be expected by the Abbott government to step up and fund such a minuscule payment.

The shadow minister for families and payments, Jenny Macklin, specifically asked the Prime Minister on 18 March precisely where and when the Prime Minister announced that this specific payment to the widows and orphans of war veterans would be cut. Despite the Prime Minister saying that he consulted widely with stakeholders, the RSL were not aware of this cut. Legacy is pleading with the government to reconsider. Young Western Australians were not consulted. They were not told that the cost of the assistance was the same as giving just four high-income earners the Prime Minister's extravagant and unfair Paid Parental Leave scheme. I would be ashamed as an Australian to think that we had cut this payment of $211 and a few cents per year to fund an extravagant parental leave scheme. I would be absolutely ashamed if we were to take that money from the children of veterans and give it to people who have still got a mum and dad in their family—people who have not suffered the ravages of war and who have not suffered a horrific and tragic death in their families. That would be the ultimate injustice.

The Prime Minister keeps telling us, 'If you want to fix the economy you've got to fix the budget first.' I am aware of the arguments from the other side—that this income support bonus was expected to be funded by the minerals resource rent tax and, without the MRRT, the government can no longer afford to supplement the income of the children of veterans—including some who are homeless. What rubbish, what nonsense and what selfishness to take away such a small payment, $211.20—a very, very small payment in the budget of a government but a payment that would really make a difference in the lives of the families of veterans.

This is nothing but bullying by the Abbott government. It is the bullying of a handful of children—just 1,200 children. For the Abbott government to say that it plays any reasonable part in fixing the budget whilst retaining the gold-plated parental leave scheme is just insulting. I would challenge the Prime Minister to stand up before one of the children from whom he is taking this benefit and explain why he is doing that. In my view, it amounts to reverse class warfare. And to be so unapologetic is callous. The cost of providing this assistance—as we have heard senator after senator say in this place today—is just under $254,000 a year. It is a sad day when the government puts their pledge to have the budget in surplus ahead of the welfare of children of veterans who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

Dave Spillman, President of the Kwinana Branch of the RSL in Western Australia said:

We’re shocked the Prime Minister would cut something that helps the kids of RSL members like this. When Western Australians fight for Australia, get injured for Australia and die for Australia, we don’t think it’s too much to ask for their kids to get a helping hand. The armed services are important in Western Australia and the Prime Minister should remember that. We call on Prime Minister Abbott to reverse this decision.

Presumably the RSL is the major stakeholder, but obviously they were not consulted. It certainly does not sound like the Kwinana branch or Dave Spillman or any of the executives in Western Australia were consulted. I agree with the RSL on this matter. As the child of a veteran, I can understand how they feel. But I too am absolutely disgusted with the government's decision. This cut is unnecessary, and $254,000 will not achieve the budget surplus the government believes the country so desperately needs.

Where are the government's priorities? I don't believe that if you want to fix the economy you have to fix the budget first. As a West Australian, I can think of a number of things we need before we need a budget surplus. How about a fast, efficient rail network? The RAC tells us in Western Australia that congestion is a massive cost to business. What about some roads that were promised linking eastern suburbs such as Ellenbrook and the Swan Valley? How about addressing the high cost of housing in Western Australia? What is the Prime Minister's answer when parents ask why schools in WA are not equal, why school performance is dependent on postcode and not funding and why some WA students exit school barely literate? The Prime Minister does not have an answer; the Abbott government cannot look WA parents in the eyes as it has no plan.

If the government places a priority on getting to surplus ahead of these matters and cannot even put aside $260,000 to help the families of those who have put their lives on the line for our country to gain access to education, how will it ever prioritise every other issue for Western Australians? My father gave his youth to this country serving as a commando on the Kokoda Trail. Thankfully, he came home, but for those children and those partners who lose their loved ones, taking this minuscule amount of money away from children who have suffered the most unimaginable loss is absolutely unthinkable and mean-spirited.