Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

Yesterday there were questions in question time in relation to the extension of compulsory income management in the Northern Territory and other sites. Whilst failing to answer the questions during question time, you did come to the chamber after question time and put on the record that it is the intention of the Albanese Labor government to extend compulsory income management in the Northern Territory and other income management sites around Australia. Today the Minister for Indigenous Australians said in the House, 'Mandatory income management has been a failure across the board, and we do not believe in mandatory income management.' Can you please clarify to me your position on extending compulsory income management in the Northern Territory and other sites with the position of the Minister for Indigenous Australians, who has today publicly said, 'We do not believe in mandatory income management.' You have extended that today in selected sites across Australia, whilst this piece of legislation seeks to move away from compulsory management in other places. Perhaps the minister might be able to explain to us why the government has made the decision to keep compulsory income management in place in the Northern Territory particularly, but has taken it out of other sites. The Northern Territory income management predominantly affects Indigenous Australians. In other sites around Australia with the CDC there's not necessarily as high a number of Indigenous Australians. Why has the government chosen to keep compulsory or mandatory income management in place for a majority Indigenous population?