Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (Senator Evans) and the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Senator Conroy) to questions without notice asked by Senators Bernardi and Coonan today relating to Indigenous affairs in the Northern Territory and to the proposed luxury car tax.

Senators heard today unequivocally that the Labor Party intends to dud pensioners. It seems that those on the other side of the chamber are in complete denial about what the leaders of the Labor Party are saying and the reality of the difficulties that are facing pensioners as we speak. The Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, said that he could not live on the single pension of $546.80 per fortnight. He would rather study the problem and not fix it. The Deputy Prime Minister, Ms Julia Gillard, says the same thing. So does the Treasurer, Mr Swan, and the finance minister, Lindsay Tanner. If they were honest, I am sure that the whole of cabinet—on their ministerial salaries—would agree that they could not live on the single pension of a measly $273 a week. This is a national disgrace and the Labor Party knows it. Payment of course will be adjusted for inflation on 20 September, but the Rudd Labor government has no plans to deliver any additional money until—wait for it—it has not one, but two reviews: first of all the Harmer review, which is not due until February, and then all of those results are to be swept into the Henry review, which is not due to report until the end of 2009. So effectively that is two years before pensioners can expect to see any serious adjustment in their base rate.

We have to ask: why this delay on the part of the Labor government when everyone knows pensioners need action now. The families and community services minister, Jenny Macklin, says, ‘Yes, we want to get pensions right and that’s why we haven’t moved immediately.’ What that means is the government want to wait until all of these reviews feed through, but there is nothing to help pensioners in the meantime. This argument by the government that they have to wait to get things right is totally threadbare. The evidence for that is that the government had absolutely no problem, no difficulty at all, proposing an increase in the luxury car tax before finalisation of the Bracks review of the automotive industry and the Henry review of taxation. We heard Senator Conroy’s pitiful attempt—not an attempt, but a pitiful attempt—to deal with the delay that the Bracks review involved before the automotive industry and Henry review of taxation came down. The same applies with the introduction of the solar panel rebate ahead of the climate change review. It is absolute nonsense that the government need to wait until they get the results of the Henry review before they can move on pensions.

So when it is a tax grab, this Rudd Labor government has no need to wait for an inquiry, no need at all to wait before imposing imposts on the car industry—no need to get that right—No need to even let voters in on the secret that they would be slugged a surcharge to buy a medium-priced Australian vehicle. When it comes to pensions, however, it is a very different story. We now know that in May the Rudd government considered an 83-page set of fully costed proposals prior to the budget with a number of options. And guess what happened? Yes, pensioners were dudded once again, passed over once again. Somehow or other it is not time to act when it comes to looking after pensioners, the most vulnerable people in our community, but there is no problem at all in slugging the Australian car industry with the luxury car tax, putting up prices on Australian vehicles and imposing an increased threshold on solar panels until there is a further review. So this business about waiting until there is a review is absolute nonsense and Australian pensioners need to hold Labor to account. (Time expired)

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I think this might be the first chance I have had to congratulate you on your election as Deputy President.

Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s a bit late! You could have written to him or something!

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is the first chance I have had with the Deputy President in the chair. We have just heard from Senator Coonan. She used the phrase that in our budget pensioners were ‘ignored again’. Think about that statement. She said ‘again’ because for 12 years, when you were in government, you did absolutely nothing! That is the record of your government when you were in power. You get up here and you start claiming what the Labor government did not do in its first budget. I will tell you what the government did in its first budget: it increased pensions. They will rise by $15.30 per fortnight from 20 September and by $12.70 per fortnight for partner pensions. There is also the $500 bonus to all eligible pensioners, the increase in the utilities allowance to $500, the increase in the seniors concession allowance from $218 to $500 a year and a range of other improvements for pensioners.

We know that, whatever governments can do for pensioners, we would always like to do more. And this government is about endeavouring to do more for pensioners by doing it the appropriate way—through a review of the system to get pensioners entitlements in the future onto a proper footing. You had 12 years of record surpluses in just about every budget you ran. In every budget that the then Treasurer, Peter Costello, brought down he would predict a $10 billion surplus and then, at the end of the year, it would be $15 billion. You had all of these surpluses every year, and what did you do to address the fundamental issue of getting pensioners entitlements and pensioners payments onto a proper basis and giving them some real relief? You did absolutely nothing!

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Forshaw, in spite of your good wishes, I would like you to address the chair.

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy President—I will do that. Throughout that entire period of time, what did you do with the surplus? You handed it out largely in tax cuts to those people who did not need it, when you could have actually addressed some of the real issues affecting low-paid workers and pensioners. But, no, you bought your way to winning election campaigns by massive tax cuts, generally just before the election occurred.

The previous government left us with high interest rates, interest rates that had gone up 10 times in a row under your government. It went up 10 times in a row under the previous government. The only time it has decreased on the last 12 occasions that it has been considered by the Reserve Bank was at the last decision, made a couple of weeks ago. High interest rates, inflation that was on a runaway path, and you left the Labor government with the situation of having to bring down a budget, its first budget, in those economic circumstances of higher interest rates, the prospect of continuing high interest rates and the prospect of increasing inflation affecting food prices, rents and so on. Those are the very things that affect pensioners and low-income earners the most. And the opposition has the hide to come in here, attack us and put forward a proposal just off the top of the head to introduce a private member’s bill to increase the pension by $30 a week. You do that in the first 10 months of a Labor government when you sat around in this building for 12 years in much better economic circumstances and did not even consider it; not on one occasion did you actually consider having a proper review of the entire system of pensions, which is what the current government has set in train.

The opposition has the hide to get up here and talk about what we supposedly have not done for pensioners. Pensioners know that under a Labor government, with the increases that were in the previous budget—and we would like to do more—their future will be better. (Time expired)

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to deal immediately with the furphy that Senator Forshaw put into this debate, which I might say was mentioned in the course of question time by both Senator Evans and Senator Conroy when they gave answers to questions. They have repeated this claim that the former government did nothing about the size of the pension or the living standards of older Australians. We know that that statement is completely untrue. I do not expect those opposite to believe my say-so or the say-so of anybody on this side of the chamber. But I do hope that members opposite will take seriously the findings of a Senate committee and will particularly pay regard to the unanimous findings of the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs, which, at the initiative of Labor members, looked at the question of the living standards of older Australians.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A bipartisan committee.

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And it was a bipartisan committee, which made unanimous findings about this very question. This was a central issue in this inquiry: what was happening to the standards of living of older Australians? What was happening to the age pension during the life of the Howard government? This is what the committee found:

The evidence before the committee is highly persuasive that the real incomes of recipients of the age pension and superannuation have experienced substantial growth over the last decade over increases in inflation. In the case of the age pension, the indexation of pension levels to MTAWE has been responsible for a substantial increase in the real value of the pension. In part this has been the result of the growth in real wages that has partly been a product of the government’s workplace relations reform over the past 11 years.

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Forshaw interjecting—

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These are Labor members signing up to this statement, Senator Forshaw. It continues:

Workplace relations reform in turn led to increases in pensions.

It is true: it did. I continue the quote:

Similarly, since the introduction of compulsory superannuation in 1992, the rise in the level of the guarantee in 2002 and the growth in real wages, superannuation balances have inexorably grown.

That was the finding of the entire Senate community affairs committee—that there had been an increase in the real value of pensions during the life of the Howard government as a result of our decision a decade ago to link pension levels to increases in male total average weekly earnings. That was our finding. It was not a matter of debate or argument; the committee readily came to that conclusion. Why? Because the evidence was absolutely overwhelming.

Senator Forshaw said in this debate, ‘What did you do with the budget surplus?’ In part we spent it increasing the pensions of older Australians, the age pension. What is more, not only did we do that but I can tell you by how much we did it quite precisely, because again the committee looked at this question. It found:

FaCSIA has estimated that the indexation of the pension to MTAWE has increased age pension expenditure by $12.99 billion (in December 2006 dollars) than it otherwise would have been. Figure 3.1 highlights the growth in the real value of the pension compared with rises in the CPI. Members can clearly see how much bigger the pension was under the Howard government by virtue of its decision to link it to MTAWE.

That is the evidence that the Senate committee came to. So let us put to one side this completely false claim that the previous government did nothing about increasing the living standards of older Australians. However, the committee did not find, despite those measures, that the position of older Australians was satisfactory. That is why we supported the move by Jenny Macklin last year to have an inquiry into the living standards of older Australians. That is why we supported this report saying there had to be action on this question and why today we stand here prepared to take that responsibility seriously by virtue of a $30 a week increase in the pension rate for single pensioners, an issue which was found by the inquiry to have been seriously a problem for those pensioners facing that particular rate of pension.

We have put on the table positive action on an issue which you people said only 12 months ago was urgent, was necessary to act upon. We have proposed that action and we want you to support us in taking that action—real, tangible action to raise the living standards of older Australians. (Time expired)

Mark Arbib (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Rudd government fully understands how tough pensioners are doing it. It is something that numerous ministers have talked about. That is exactly why in the last budget the Rudd government delivered around $900 in relief to pensioners. That is equivalent to an increase of six per cent in the pension. In the budget we boosted spending on seniors from $1.3 billion to $5.2 billion because we recognised the former government’s neglect of pensioners over the last decade. Pensioners will also receive an increase of around three per cent to their pensions—that is about $15 a week—on 20 September. But we also recognise that more has to be done. We are not into knee-jerk, bandaid remedies. We are talking about a change across the board. That is why the Henry review is looking carefully at the adequacy of retirement incomes and also at the pension.

Brendan Nelson is obviously under a great deal of leadership pressure at the moment. One minute it is Peter Costello and the next minute it is Malcolm Turnbull. In his rush to buy himself some breathing space, Mr Nelson has forgotten about the 2.2 million married pensioners, carers, widows, veterans and disability recipients. Do the Liberals think carers are doing it any less tough than single pensioners? Do the Liberals think widows are doing it any less tough than single pensioners? Do the Liberals think those on disability pensions are doing it any less tough than age pensioners? It is quite interesting, when you go through and talk to some of the lobby groups in those industries, to hear their opinions on what Brendan Nelson has put forward.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Arbib, it is ‘Mr Nelson’ or ‘the Leader of the Opposition’. I am sorry, but you must use the correct title.

Mark Arbib (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to quote a few of the lobby groups, because it is quite interesting to hear what they have to say. People with Disability Australia says:

The announcement by the opposition leader, Brendan Nelson, that seeks to increase the single age pension ... lacks insight and consideration of other groups of people who receive the same amount of social security through other pension payments. Queensland Advocacy Incorporated says that it is extremely disappointed that the federal opposition leader, Brendan Nelson, has ignored disability support pensioners in his belated pension increase bid. Why is the coalition continuing to ignore people with disability and condemning them to a life of abject poverty, isolation and heightened vulnerability?

Family Advocacy says:

Brendan Nelson’s acknowledgement of the difficulties of living on a single age pension forgets the poorest group in our society.

The National Council on Intellectual Disability says:

The Liberal and National parties have completely lost sight of the financial situation of people with disabilities and those family members who provide ongoing support to them by calling only for an increase in the age pension.

The Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia says:

Dr Nelson spent Tuesday speaking with hundreds of veterans at the RSL’s National Congress yet the next day appears to have forgotten about us.

Not only is Dr Nelson’s plan economically irresponsible but it also forgets about the most vulnerable in our society. It shows in the end that what this is really about is a stunt. First we had his stunt on petrol; now we have his stunt on pensioners—raising the hopes of the most vulnerable. The economic circumstances around it are unbelievable. If you look at what Dr Nelson has rolled out of the last 12 months, we are talking about a $4.9 billion black hole in the budget. That is in a year, and it equates to 23 per cent of the surplus.

When you ask anyone in the coalition, ‘How are we going to pay for this?’ the answer is, ‘We will just take it out of the surplus.’ I remember the last 12 years of coalition government. They used to worship the surplus. Now they say: ‘We will just spend it. It’s 23 per cent of the surplus. What does that matter?’ The truth is that you had 12 years to do something about it and you did nothing. When Mal Brough took exactly the same proposition to the cabinet, it was knocked back. This is just a cheap stunt to try and save Dr Nelson’s own political credibility. (Time expired)

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Community Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is extraordinary to sit here and to have to listen to some of the nonsense being spewed by those on the government side. Quite frankly, they are justifying a complete lack of action; they are justifying their complete ignorance of the needs of pensioners by saying that they are not doing anything else or that the coalition’s proposal is not helping others that are out there. This is a complete furphy. It is nonsense. We have proposed some concrete action because this government is ignoring the needs of those who are on fixed incomes—that is, age pensioners specifically on this occasion.

Senator Arbib talked about disability pensioners—of course the coalition wants to help them—but what Senator Arbib is probably not familiar with is the fact that disability pensioners have a range of additional benefits that are not available to age pensioners. The coalition is proposing that we help those who are struggling right now. Let us help age pensioners and then let us move on and assess these other things as we go along. There are two million people in this country who are on the age pension and have been ignored by this government. This government has been fiddling while these pensioners are unable to fill their car with petrol, unable to feed themselves or unable to turn the heater on during a cold winter for fear of not being able to afford it. This is a cold and dark-hearted government. There is no question about that. They have failed Australians.

Mr Rudd, in his lovely manner, went out and promised Australians that he would ease their cost-of-living burdens. He has failed to do it. He has said, ‘We are going to wait and we are going to have one of 150 reviews, and then we will respond to it.’ We cannot believe that because Mr Rudd has pre-empted the results of his reviews whenever it has suited him. He has said, ‘Let’s pay Mr Bracks five-hundred-and-something dollars a day to have a car review but, because we probably will not like what we are going to hear, let’s just introduce a new tax along the way.’ He has said, ‘Let’s have a review of the Northern Territory emergency response’—which this Senate agreed to—‘but, before we get the results of that, let’s change some things that keep the communities safer.’ He has said, ‘Let’s have a review of solar panel rebates but, before we review that and before we have that final report, let’s just impose a means test.’

This is a government that puts spin above substance every single time, and it is appalling for the members of the government to come in here and try to justify the neglect of two million people who have served this country in so many capacities but are now reliant on the age pension. These people, most of whom have very few assets outside of their family home, are being forced to do things they do not really want to do. They are forced to get reverse equity mortgages, they are forced to go without food and they are forced to stop their entertainment because this government will not find $30 a week—I repeat, $30 a week. I challenge the government to understand how meaningful that sum can be to an age pensioner. They dress it up by saying, ‘We are going to have a review and in 2010, probably, we might be able to do something about it.’ I say, and the coalition says, that is simply not good enough.

We have heard their manufactured excuses and we have heard their justifications that really just demonstrate how callous they are. We have also seen all sorts of other speculation brought into it, such as it cutting a hole in the budget surplus. I am a taxpayer, and the taxpayers I speak to do not mind pensioners getting a better deal. They realise the contribution they have made to this country. But somehow those on the government bench say that, no, a surplus should be accumulated for no worthwhile purpose and, in the meantime, for 15 or 18 months people can go hungry whilst we have $23 billion in the bank. There is something wrong with the priorities of this government, and it is something that strikes to the very heart of why they came into power. They are not in it to help people. They are in power for power’s sake. Mr Rudd has spent his entire life being a bureaucrat, trying to climb the ladder, and now he has finally got there he does not know what to do. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.