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

Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President—that is much appreciated. The measures in those bills were a hodgepodge of measures designed to attack the most vulnerable members of our community. We know that because NATSEM clearly pointed out that the burden of these government measures fell on the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of our community. They were cruel and carefully targeted to undermine our safety net. These measures are similar in that they hurt families by changing the family tax benefits. They particularly hurt people with disabilities, they hurt single parents and they hurt students. I know my colleagues will be making a contribution on the impact on students and the abolition of the relocation allowance—something that the Greens have been concerned about and working on for a very long time. When we had the Senate inquiry into the other two social services bills, Nos 1 and 2, the NUS were very clear in their opposition to the measures that affected the relocation allowance because they undermined students' ability to study and relocate. They were really clear in their message that they opposed that measure, along with other measures and in particular the measures that are not contained in this bill that affect young people that the government has put into other bills that they will continue to try to get through—and we will continue to oppose them. They rip at the fundamentals of the income support system in this country.

This government obviously still has not got the message because they still want to bring these measures into this place. They will continue to be rejected, I hope, time and time again. But on this particular bill these are measures that the ALP has agreed with the government to support. We will oppose these measures because, as I said, they are the start of the slippery slope down to undermining our social safety net. Labor well know that these measures are not supported by the broader community—they are clearly not supported by the community, and I know that because of the number of phone calls we have been getting about them.

I turn to the impact on people with disabilities. Here we have Labor agreeing with the government to reassess thousands and thousands of people under the age of 35 on the disability support pension, not with a view to assessing whether they have an ability to work but with a view to dumping people onto Newstart, which is a much lower payment—in fact, it is below the poverty line. If the government really cared about helping people into work and out of poverty, they would be looking at increasing Newstart, for a start. Instead, they go the other way and demonise and punish people. Labor started this process, so I am not surprised that they are supporting it. They started this process by bringing in the 'you have to try to find work for 18 months before you can even apply for DSP' system. Labor started it, so why should I be surprised that they are continuing the process and are now agreeing to reassess people under the age of 35 with a disability? People under the age of 35 with a disability are extremely worried and concerned about their future, and I share their concern. They are concerned that they will be dumped on to Newstart—dumped into trying to live under the poverty line with a disability. We know that poverty is a barrier to finding work. If it is a barrier to finding work for somebody who does not have a disability, imagine what it is like for a person with a disability. It doubles or at least significantly magnifies the impact of living in poverty for a person with a disability.

They have to manage living with a disability below the poverty line, but there are other barriers that they face from living in poverty. That was clearly articulated to the community affairs committee when we were looking at previous measures that meant that people were not going to be able to access the disability support pension, and that they would have to look for work on Newstart. I can remember a number of witnesses who raised very valid and important concerns about issues about just being able to get transport to work and how they would be able to access the disability support services employment services that were not adequate. They worried too about being able to maintain that work and cycling in and out of work because they would find it harder to maintain connection with work with a disability and they would not get the support in the workplace that enables them to maintain that connection with work. People from regional Australia raised concerns about people with disabilities, particularly those living on Newstart in regional areas and having to participate and meet their workplace requirements.

This is an ill-thought through measure that is designed to save the government a little bit of money, but which will cause a great deal of anguish and concern to people with disabilities. Instead of dumping people with a disability off the Disability Support Pension and on to Newstart, we should be investing in more support to help people with a disability to engage with work. We also need to make sure that we are providing the best possible support for our disability support employment agencies and for Job Services Australia agencies, because a large number of people with disabilities also access Job Services Australia rather than disability support employment organisations. We should be focusing our attention on helping people to overcome their barriers to work, to access work and to maintain that work.

Then we come to the measure of reducing the portability for people on the Disability Support Pension to four weeks. According to their explanatory memorandum for this particular bill, that saves the government $5 million—although they do say that that is indicative only, as it refers to 'whole-of-government financial impact, including administration and implementation funding.' Labor—why have you supported this measure? Why did you agree to this measure? This is an appalling measure. Lowering down their portability from six weeks to four weeks—why? It is because they are saying: 'We are punishing you. How dare you travel overseas with a disability.' It beggars belief that they would think that this is acceptable. I have had an overwhelming number of people who are highly distressed about this particular measure contact my office to say that they have been saving for years to be able to go on a trip. Sometimes it is to spend time with their family; other times it is actually to see the world—to see a country they have always wanted to visit, just like everybody else wants to travel. Guess what? Somebody with a disability wants to do that too—to travel overseas. What the government saying is: 'No—we want to remind you that we control you.' People with a disability want to be able to travel. They have saved up—and believe me, when you are living on a disability support pension you are not living in the lap of luxury. Yes, you are living on more money than you would be living on Newstart, but Newstart is below the poverty line. Talk to any person with a disability or in fact someone on the aged pension, because they are the same—they are still scraping to make ends meet. They manage to save a bit of money to be able to go to see their family or to travel overseas, and what the government is saying now is: 'You can only go for four weeks. That is it, because we are trying to punish you for having a disability.'

There is no logical, rational explanation for wanting to reduce this portability from six weeks, which has already been reduced under previous governments, to four weeks. There is no rational, fair-minded reasoning for this particular measure, other than their being mean and in demonising. We do not support it. We do not agree with the deal that has been done between Labor and the government because it is just mean-spirited. It is nothing more than a mean-spirited attempt at demonising people with a disability because they want to drive the broader budget savings, they claim, by going for people with a disability.

Then you have the measure—and I have raised some concerns about this before—relating to relocation scholarship assistance for certain students. When considering this measure, you have to put it in the context of what else the government wants to bring in, the other measures that will impose extra costs on students and make it even more difficult for them to study. The government is making it more difficult for young people to study, to learn, which is what the government say it wants them to do. The government says it wants young people to earn or learn, but when they try to learn the government puts more and more barriers in their way.

If the government had had their way, they would have been putting in yet another barrier—increasing poverty even more—by removing income support for young people. Thankfully the community backlash has been so strong that they cannot get that measure through. The Greens and I will keep campaigning until the government completely and utterly drops that measure. It is a measure that would totally undermine Australia's safety net. It would have implications right across the community and it would have lifelong impacts. We will continue to oppose that measure and we will continue to fight for an increase in Newstart and youth allowance in order to help young people create a future for themselves. We will continue to fight to keep the government from taking away young people's hope for the future. Removing income support would take away their hope, because they would be living below the poverty line, living hand to mouth. What the government is doing here with this measure on relocation assistance is putting another barrier to learning in the way of students, particularly rural students. We already know that people living in rural and regional areas have much higher barriers to overcome in order to attend university.

Another area we have strong concerns about are the changes being made to family tax benefits. These measures will make it harder for families. I strongly agree with the point made by the National Welfare Rights Network that we need to look at these measures and the changes to family tax benefits in the context of the other budget measures this government is planning to bring through. In other words, we need to look at the cumulative impact, which is very significant. If you add the changes to family tax benefits to the co-payment measures and the higher education measures—although I am still anticipating, and certainly very much hoping, that these other measures do not get through—the cumulative impact on families is severe. You cannot look at the measures the government wants to inflict on families in isolation. It is extremely important that they are looked at in their entirety and not in isolation.

We are extremely disappointed that Labor has agreed to let the government bring this bill on with very little time to debate it. I assume the government hopes they can get it through quickly now so that people do not notice. Do they think people are going to forget that these measures have been rammed through the House of Representatives? Do they think people are not going to notice that some of these measures are going to have significant impacts on students, people with disabilities, families—across the board? The other measures, the co-payments and so on, are still there as well. We will never support them. We will not support these bills because they have unacceptable impacts.

The government needs to change its thinking, if that is possible, about the way to look after the most vulnerable in our community. Punishing and demonising people does not work. A better way to go is to adopt an inclusive approach, a supportive approach that helps people, that does not undermine them, that does not take money out of their pockets. Fundamental to that is adequacy of payments. When is the government going to realise that living in poverty does not help people engage with work? When will it realise that we need to make sure that people are not living in poverty and that they have access to the types of supports they need? Keeping people in poverty and subjecting them to work-for-the-dole programs that provide no training and no support does not work.

The Greens will not be supporting this bill. We do not agree with the deal that has been done between Labor and the government. Labor are trying to imply that these measures do not have an impact on our community when they do. Changes to the family tax benefit do, changes to the disability support pension do and changes to the relocation allowance have an impact, an unacceptable impact, on the most vulnerable in our community. We do not support these budget measures. We will not be supporting this bill.