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

The Greens also spoke about this bill at the time and some concerns were expressed. We had a lot of concerns around this particular bill when we spoke about it in the chamber. People will also remember that when we put in our dissenting report to the committee inquiry into the 2014-15 budget measures, this was the measure that we thought, if you were considering it in the context of a retirement income review, would be one that would make the most sense of all of those terrible budget measures that the government sought to put through this place last year.

As the government noted last week, they have now committed to a review, through the tax white paper process, of looking at retirement income reviews and a more holistic approach. Although the government have not committed to some of the policy changes that we would like to see, at least we now have that retirement income review and people can participate in it. People can see the need for changes. As the Council on the Ageing said on Radio National before the budget:

… it's clear that there's a broad consensus out there in the sector that wasn't there five years ago as to how the basic architecture of the system ought to be restructured—

and we agree. We agree that the system does need a significant amount of change. The removal of this payment is in fact one of the first steps to what we believe would be a fairer system, a system where it makes sense to make sure that those who have the advantages that have allowed them to accumulate their wealth can, in fact, start using those assets that they have accumulated.

As we know, the senior supplement is a payment to older Australians who do not in fact qualify for the age pension. They do not qualify at all for the pension because their personal wealth and accumulated savings are very significant. In fact, in order to qualify for this supplement you have to have a significant amount of savings and assets. In the context of the changes that have occurred through this budget measure and the fact that we now have a commitment to a retirement income review, we have re-looked at this bill and we now think that this is an appropriate measure.

We also need to bear in mind the ACOSS report that has just come out today, which talks about inequality and points out that wealth and income inequality in this country is a huge issue. Although the report says that Australia's is above average for the OECD, in fact inequality is still, fortunately, below that in the US and that in the UK and a few other countries—but it is above average in the OECD. We need to address the issue around wealth and income inequality now or it is only going to get worse. The top 20 per cent hold 70 times the wealth of the rest of Australia. That is a significant issue that needs to be addressed.

We know that income inequality has a devastating impact on a society. It lowers health outcomes and it means that there are fewer opportunities for people to gain access to education to get better jobs. It can increase intergenerational inequality. These are all things that we believe need to be addressed. I think the ACOSS report is a very timely report that highlights this fact, and we are bearing that issue in mind whenever we look at these measures. We believe that a system of addressing income inequality and retirement income has only just started being addressed in this country. There is broad agreement among stakeholders that the system is not working—that it is skewed and needs to be re-addressed. We are starting to take those first steps now. We are looking at the long-term aim of having a fairer system for all people on income support, particularly those who have to rely on the pension.