Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Evans. Can the minister explain why, when the Prime Minister announced her ministry on 11 September, there was no member of the executive given specific responsibility for disabilities and carers? Why, when the Prime Minister was asked, was she unable to say who had responsibility? Why did it take several days for the Prime Minister to belatedly announce that Senator McLucas would have that responsibility?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am just a bit surprised that the opposition has run out of questions on the first day.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, disability isn’t important!

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You would realise, of course, that this issue was canvassed in great detail in the last few weeks.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If it was so well known, why couldn’t she remember?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Abetz, if you are going to put out a media release and break your duck for a while, that would be great, because we have been missing you for some months. I understand the ACTU have out a bulletin looking for you.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Ignore the interjections on both sides. Senator Evans, when we have silence on both sides we will proceed.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I say, this issue was canvassed in the press some weeks ago, and explanations were given. It is the case that when the Prime Minister announced the ministry she announced that Ms Roxon was to be the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator McLucas would be in the portfolio and Ms Macklin would have Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. As the senator knows, Senator McLucas has had a long interest in these issues and was active in these issues when we were in opposition and in government. She was a particularly good choice for the portfolio. The arrangements that existed under the first—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order on the question of relevance. The answer is not directly relevant to the question. The minister was asked to provide the explanation for an omission. He has not addressed that question. Nothing he has said bears directly on that issue. Mr President, you have in the previous parliament ruled that ministers have been relevant. If you can rule that, you can rule that they have not been relevant, and you can certainly rule that they have not been directly relevant. If so, to enforce the sessional order, you should either direct the minister to the question or direct him to resume his seat.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When we have silence we will proceed. This is not assisting question time, with the interjections on both sides.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, the minister has been directly relevant to the question asked. Unfortunately, what the opposition want is a directly relevant question that they have in mind which is impermissible. What the minister has been answering is the question that was asked in respect of the Health and Ageing ministry and the minister in relation to the disability area. The minister has been providing an answer in response to the question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I believe the minister is answering the question and has a remaining 32 seconds to address the other issues that are in the question.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was making clear, Senator McLucas has a long interest in the area. She was previously the opposition spokesperson. She is well regarded in the sector. She succeeds Mr Shorten, who had an excellent reputation in the area and was responsible for significant improvements in the support for people with disabilities and their carers in the term of the first Labor government. I think it is an excellent appointment. As I say, that has been clear for some weeks now. I look forward to working with Senator McLucas in that role. (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I am pleased that the minister has worked out that disabilities actually is not in the health portfolio. Given the expectation within the sector that there would be a dedicated disabilities minister, deliberately built up by Mr Shorten’s promise to have the portfolio elevated, why did the government not appoint a minister for disabilities?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The arrangements in relation to the ministry and the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers are, as I understand it, the same as existed under the last government, the first Labor government. They are the same arrangements, as I understand it, that existed under the previous Howard government. What I can advise you is that that arrangement—that is, having a senior minister for FaHCSIA and a parliamentary secretary under that minister with a direct responsibility for disabilities and carers—continues as it was under the Howard government and under the first Labor government.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given the growing profile and awareness of disability issues, don’t Australians with a disability and their carers deserve a dedicated minister at least as much as the arts or sport does?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What people with a disability and their carers need, Senator, is a government committed to reform, a government committed to supporting them and a government that delivers. That is what they got from this government in its first term. That is what they will get from this government in its second term. As I have said in relation to other issues, it is not the title; it is whether you do the work. This is the government that delivered the largest increase ever to pensioners in this country. This is the government that increased the disability support pension and carer payment. This is the government that doubled funding to the states and territories under the National Disability Agreement.

We have also been responsible for putting disability back on the national agenda, after 12 years of neglect, with the National Disability Strategy and the Productivity Commission inquiry. The opposition may want to focus on arguments about titles, but the reality is that the government will continue to deliver improvements for people with disabilities. (Time expired)