Stirling Griff (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

Centre Alliance was never going to support this bill, for the obvious reason that the government never advanced a sound reason for increasing the newly arrived residents waiting period from the current two years. The bill was originally titled the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Encouraging Self-sufficiency for Newly Arrived Migrants) Bill 2018 and it's now morphed into what appears to be the more friendly-sounding Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Promoting Sustainable Welfare) Bill 2018. What a joke! It is a joke.

It was sent to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry in March, with the committee being due to report back in May. However, the tabling of the report was pushed back 10 times. Why 10 times? Because Labor couldn't decide whether to do the right thing and oppose this bill or to pass it and use the savings for the time when they assume they will be in government. That is what this is all about. It's all about money. It's not about doing the right thing by migrants. So, instead, Labor brokered a compromise that no stakeholder was after. The reinvented bill was whisked through the other place yesterday and we on the crossbench have had not even 24 hours to digest the changes. So, next time Labor have a go at anyone else in this chamber for rushing legislation or guillotining debate, they should remember today and the shameful rush job they have engineered to the detriment of newly arrived migrants.

We have not been given any compelling reasons for extending the newly arrived residents waiting period, aside from the $1.3 billion in revenue the government expects to save over the forward years. The sum of $1.3 billion was in the original bill, and this is the same amount the government will reap after the so-called compromise bill we have before us today. In Labor's additional comments to the report of the inquiry, it highlighted its serious concern—serious concern—about the impact of extending the waiting period for newly arrived residents. Well, they are crocodile tears, because the day after the report was tabled we have been presented with a bill which extends the waiting period for a range of benefits not by three years, which was originally proposed in the bill, but by four years. So how can Labor say that they have serious concerns when they supported a longer waiting period?

The government and Labor are treating migrants as piggy banks by doubling the amount of time they will have to wait for benefits, without any thought whatsoever to the hardship this can cause. Both major parties should hang their head in shame at the cynical money-grabbing approach that they have taken with this bill. And, contrary to Senator Cameron's earlier assertions, if Labor had stood firm, this bill would absolutely have been defeated, and we'll see that with divisions very soon. The bill would have been defeated—let's be clear about that. So, if Labor had serious concerns, this bill could have been stopped.

In our dissenting report we recommended the bill be rejected in its current form. The deal that Labor has reached with the government does absolutely nothing to address the deep concerns we have about the bill and the deep concerns expressed by refugee and migrant organisations. New residents will, as we've said before, wait longer, and it puts them in a very vulnerable position. And if Labor thinks that it's doing new residents a favour, well, they are well and truly kidding themselves. Migrants are better off under the existing regime, not under the self-serving deal which we have before us today.

Under this bill permanent migrants will have to wait one year for family tax benefit part A, which helps low- to middle-income families with the cost of rearing their family, and they will have to wait two years for paid parental leave, and dad and partner pay. Single parents at least won't have to serve any waiting period for family tax part B or parenting payment, but carers—think about it: carers—will now have to wait one year for the carer allowance and two years before they can get a carer payment; that's two years.

Thanks to Labor and its deal with the government, new residents of working age will have to wait four years instead of the current two-year waiting period before they can claim Newstart, youth allowance, parenting payment, sickness allowance, bereavement allowance and a range of other benefits—so much for the Labor Party that prides itself on social issues. When I say four years, in reality it will be longer than that for many new residents because of the time it takes to achieve residency in the first place.

Many of us here would know of someone who has experienced—in fact even many in this place may have—a point in their lives where they have been forced temporarily onto benefits because of unforeseen circumstances such as suddenly losing a job or needing to care for a sick loved one. But, apparently, even though the rest of us would find it impossible to plan financially in advance for scenarios like that, new residents, new migrants, are now expected to do it for up to four years. So we'd find it impossible to plan, but we expect them to have the money and everything put aside for them to survive for four years.

Myriad reports indicate very strongly, and we know for a fact, that most migrants are already self-sufficient—they come here with the intention of working and supporting themselves. They don't come here to go on the dole. They don't come here to make the most of the benefits that Australia has to offer financially for those who do not contribute to society. It's plainly stupid for anyone to think that isn't the case. Non-humanitarian permanent migrants have high work participation rates, and in fact they already rely less on social security than the rest of the community does. But it's impossible, absolutely impossible, to guard against unexpected job losses and family breakdown, and these people should not be penalised for any of these instances.

The four-week waiting period is even being applied to the special benefit payment, which is a benefit of last resort. It's designed to help people in severe financial hardship who cannot access any other benefit. So, while there are some exceptions, it makes absolutely no sense to apply a waiting period of any kind to that benefit.

As I've said in my dissenting reports to the committee report, the bill also undermines the federal government's stated intention to tackle domestic violence against migrant families. In the same week that we have passed the Migration Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill which aims to protect family members from potential violent sponsors, the government is attempting to shoehorn this bill which potentially makes domestic abuse victims reliant on sponsors for longer. We simply cannot support this. And, as we said in our dissenting report, we cannot support the original bill and we absolutely cannot support the revised version either. It does not in any way serve the interests of permanent residents who come to Australia and want to contribute and make Australia home. It pulls what are currently fair safety nets out from under them and leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and severe hardship through no fault of their own.

We have started on a slippery slope. Newly arrived residents are now an easy target for so-called saviours, and I fear we'll be back here again in the future, fighting off further extensions of the waiting period for no other reason than the government, or the party that sees itself very soon being in government, wanting to line its pockets.