Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers to questions from senators Liddle, Paterson and Henderson during question time today. In response to a question from Senator Liddle, Senator Farrell said some of the most disgraceful things I have ever heard in this chamber and he did so with a little smirk on his face, as if it was somehow funny what he was saying. Senator Farrell said that the repeal of the cashless debit card was an election commitment; therefore, they had carte blanche to implement it. What he didn't say either publicly in the policy document or subsequently in this chamber was the following: he didn't say that there was no policy associated with this, that there was no detailed consideration of the impact on Australia's most vulnerable. It was simply an ideological left-wing policy statement, one that has unbelievably serious consequences for some of our most vulnerable Australians, particularly women, children and the elderly.

Anyone who takes time to visit these regions will see what the consequences will be on at-risk communities—women, the elderly and children. It is not at all necessarily about the person who has the card; it is about the behaviours that will impact, again, on women, children and the elderly, and on those who are also subject to humbugging.

It is the view of those of us on this side of the chamber that this card should be extended and not repealed. While minister said they had consulted, it was clear they had not. Ever since, she and her department have been scrambling to try and do some very inadequate consultations and get input from those on the ground. This parliament—the Senate—as I have said previously in this place, very shamefully put through a parliamentary consultation that didn't go to many communities, didn't give time for consultations and did not visit our home state of Western Australia.

So let's hear what West Australians in the communities who requested this card have said. Ian Trust, the Director of the Wunan Foundation in Kununurra said the card reduced the alcohol, violence and harassment of the elderly and vulnerable for cash when they go to use the ATM. He said, 'The cashless card is not a silver bullet but it is something and we can build on it. But there is no plan by those opposite for what happens after the CDC is abolished. We are left in a vacuum.' The government says if we want to go down the path of keeping income management, it has to be a community decision, but there is no information for the communities about how they want us to arrive at that decision or what the replacement will be. Shame on them.

In the second location in my own home state of Western Australia, the mayor of the City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder has said it seems that the cart has been put before the horse by Labor. He said, '…the decision to abolish the CDC has been made without any consultation with the regional community and the city—Kalgoorlie-Boulder—remains unconsulted' on the transition, which will impact on CDC participants, social service providers, government agencies and the community, and I will also say public health providers, who have to pick up the mess of women and children who are assaulted, raped and murdered by men in their own communities.

After we pointed all of this out, the committee from this parliament did a very, very short inquiry. And what did the government do? The minister put it out for three days of consultation with the impacted local communities. So as late as 30 August, the hastily-put-together so-called CDC engagement team sent the Goldfields a raft of draft engagement documents—four documents—and they had three working days for a local council to deal with one of the biggest and most serious issues in their communities. They sent a draft engagement plan, an engagement summary, a participant checklist and a CDC fact sheet. Well, what a triumph of bureaucracy over genuine consultation with impacted communities! The shires were given until 12 noon on 2 September—three working days later—to provide feedback. This is a disgrace, and those opposite know what the consequences will be in local communities—you cannot say you were not warned—that people will die. (Time expired)