Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

Neither you nor I is a constitutional lawyer, but my very quick interpretation of section 117—I'm not sure to what extent it's being tested by the courts—is that the Commonwealth would not impose a discrimination or disability on residents of one state that is not equally applicable across all states. The decisions in relation to lockdowns and restrictions are undertaken by independent states. They have their own sovereign rights. Their limitations, in terms of legislation, are only to the extent that the Commonwealth has power in certain areas.

I have answered a number of questions in relation to JobKeeper very similar to the one that you've asked. As I've outlined to others, JobKeeper was a highly effective program at the time. As I'm sure you would recall, at the time it was put in place there was enormous uncertainty as businesses right across Australia were being forced to close their doors in every state and territory. Businesses such as the one you mentioned were having those restrictions placed upon them, and JobKeeper was put in place to provide certainty so as to avoid the standing down of staff at the time and to provide support.

Thankfully, Australia's success meant that the economy recovered faster. Some of those restrictions were eased faster and, as a result, some of those businesses didn't suffer all of the worst consequences that had been envisaged at the time. At the time it avoided and saved going into the lockdowns. The government has subsequently, through the life of JobKeeper, tightened eligibility and requirements around its operation. Following JobKeeper, we now have an even more targeted program in place to provide economic support for Australians.