Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the seventh report of 2014 of the Selection of Bills committee and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The report read as follows—

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

REPORT NO. 7 of 2014

1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 at 7.20 pm.

2. The committee resolved to recommend—That—

(a) contingent upon its introduction in the House of Representatives, the provisions of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral);

(b) the provisions of the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014 and the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 2 and 3 for statements of reasons for referral);

(c) the provisions of the Carbon Farming Initiative Amendment Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 7 July 2014 (see appendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral);

(d) contingent upon their introduction in the House of Representatives, the provisions of the Excise Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014, the Customs Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014, the Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Special Account Bill 2014 and the Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 7 July 2014 (see appendix 5 for a statement of reasons for referral);

(e) the Migration Amendment (Protecting Babies Born in Australia) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 28 October 2014 (see appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral);

(f) the provisions of the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 26 August 2014 (see appendix 7 for a statement of reasons for referral); and

(g) the provisions of the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 1) Bill 2014 and the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 8 and 9 for statements of reasons for referral).

3. The committee resolved to recommend:

That the following bills not be referred to committees:

The committee recommends accordingly.

4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bill to its next meeting:

(Helen Kroger)

Chair

19 June 2014

APPENDIX 1

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Examination of how effective ARENA has been in developing commercial clean energy technologies for Australia's future prosperity.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

ARENA, CSIRO, Department of Industry, Local Governments, Universities, Grant Recipients or Potential Recipients in ARENA's project pipeline.

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Economics Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

24 July, 7 August, 21 August.

Possible reporting date:

4 September 2014

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 2

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014

Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

The Government did not consult stakeholders on the details of the Bill. Stakeholders have expressed to the Opposition a desire to have an opportunity to put their views on the record.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Community Affairs Legislation Committee.

Possible hearing date(s):

To be determined by the Committee,

Possible reporting date:

26 August 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

Whip/Selection of Bills Committee Member

APPENDIX 3

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014

Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To investigate the effectiveness of the payment scheme in redressing and resolving the matters associated with the application of the BSWAT Tool.

To ensure that the payment scheme will be available and fully accessible to everyone who is entitled to it.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Community Affairs Legislation Committee.

Possible hearing date(s):

25 July

Possible reporting date:

26 Aug

(signed)

Senator Siewert

Whip/Selection of Bills Committee Member

APPENDIX 4

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 5

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Excise Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014

Customs Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014

Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Bill 2014

Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Special Account Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 6

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Migration Amendment (Protecting Babies Born in Australia) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Legal obligations Australia has to babies born in Australia.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Human Rights Law Centre

Asylum Seeker Resource Centre

Amnesty International

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee.

Possible hearing date(s):

18-24 August, 2014

Possible reporting date:

28 October 2014

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 7

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To scrutinise the implications of increasing the cost of pharmaceuticals on consumers and to examine the effect of changing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme safety net

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Pharmacy Guild of Australia, Consumers Health Forum, Public Health Association of Australia

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Community Affairs

Possible hearing date(s):

To be determined by the committee

Possible reporting date:

26 August 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 8

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 1) Bill 2014

Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Controversial Budget measures are contained in these two bills, including cuts to pension indexation, cu

Possible submissions or evidence from:

ACOSS - Cassandra Goldie, Peter Davidson

UnitingCare - Lin Hatfied Dodds

National Seniors - Michael O'Neil

Council of the Aging - Ian Yates

Anglicare Australia - Kasy Chambers

Brotherhood of St Laurence - Tony Nicholson

Carers Australia - Ara Creswell

St Vincent De Paul -John Falzon

Mission Australia - Catherine Yeomans

NATSEM - Ben Philips

ANU - Peter Whiteford

ACTU - Matthew Cowgill

National Council for Single Mothers - Terese Edwards

National Welfare Rights - Maree O'Halloran, Gerard Thomas

AFDO - Matthew Wright

People with Disability Australia - Craig Wallace

National Disability Services - Ken Baker

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Community Affairs

Possible hearing date(s):

To be determined by the committee.

Possible reporting date:

26 Aug 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 9

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No.1) Bill 2014

Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Investigate the impact of this budget measure on low and middle income families who will be affected by it, particularly in relation to the financial stress and other forms of hardship that these measures may create for people.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

ACOSS

Welfare Rights

Australian Lawyers Alliance

National Union of Students

Department of Employment

Department of Social Services

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Community Affairs

Possible hearing date(s):

July 25th, July 28, Aug 6,7,8.

Possible reporting date:

Sept 4

(signed)

Senator Siewert

Whip/Selection of Bills Committee Member

I move:

  That the report be adopted.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

(1) At the end of the motion, add, 'but, in respect of:

(a) the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014, the Economics Legislation Committee report by 4 September 2014;

(b) the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014 and the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014, the Community Affairs Legislation Committee report by 26 August 2014; and

(c) the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 1) Bill 2014 and the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014, the Community Affairs Legislation Committee report by 4 September 2014.'

It will come as no surprise to anyone in the chamber that we are seeking an amendment. It relates specifically to reporting dates for a series of committees that come directly out of the budget. I have been lucky enough to have

been in the chamber and heard some of the discussion we had on the previous bills. We heard justifications from both Senator O'Sullivan and Senator Colbeck about the distinct need for effective consideration of important pieces of legislation that will have an impact on many people in our community.

The bills for which we ask for amendments to reporting dates come specifically under that heading. They are pieces of legislation which will have significant impacts on members of our community—particularly the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014 and its related bill, and the two massive social services and other legislation amendment bills—and which come directly from the budget.

If these bills, and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014, are so important—and we expect to hear from the government that they are absolutely critical pieces of legislation—the bills should have been introduced immediately after the budget was announced, because they are cause for significant changes impacting on a wide range of people. Those people have come to us. As well as coming to us, they have gone to the media and talked to their local representatives about their concerns for themselves, their families and their communities around the introduction of these budget changes—some of which have introduction dates of 1 July 2014.

These are budget changes, the impact and justification of which need to be widely considered, which were announced last month and are intended to be introduced from 1 July 2014. We know the government has a position on the budget, which they have articulated at considerable length in this place. We accept that as the motivation for the changes. What we need to know is what the impact of these changes will be. In terms of the social services and other legislation amendment bills we are already on record, through the estimates process, asking at length for details of the processes and how these changes will operate. There are significant changes to the family payment and to indexation on the income-free asset and value limits for working-age allowances. These are really intricate changes to existing processes which will have an impact—and not just by themselves, because a number of these changes will have a cumulative effect on people in our community who are already quite vulnerable.

What we have not seen at any stage is a strategic explanation of what it will mean to an individual in our community who is impacted by a range of these changes. We have asked. We have asked through Senate estimates and in this place: if you are a carer, if you are in a single-parent family, if you work in a disability workshop, what will be the change to your situation that comes out of the legislation that has been put before us?

There is an expectation, in the last week of sitting of this Senate, that we will have extraordinarily short committee hearings to look at what the changes will mean and to hear what people in the community want to say and ask about these changes. We are aware that by asking for longer consideration and a chance to have committees meet and consider these processes, there will need to be an amendment to introduction dates. We are aware of that, but that is an issue the government should have considered when they brought them in without giving us the legislation for consideration straight after the budget.

The government knows that. They understand the way this place works. They must have processes in place to look at what the impact would be with a changed introduction date. All those things are completely within the ownership of the government. It is within the capability of the government and the departments to work it out. What we say is that these bills need a longer chance for consideration for exactly the same reasons we heard strongly argued by members of the government earlier. We move the amendment as circulated in the chamber.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the following amendment to Senator Moore's amendment:

Omit all words, substitute:

At the end of the motion, add 'and, in respect of:

(a) the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014, the Economics Legislation Committee report by 7 July 2014;

(b) the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Bill 2014 and the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014, the Community Affairs Legislation Committee report by 24 June 2014; and

(c) the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 1) Bill 2014 and the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014, the Community Affairs Legislation Committee report by 23 June 2014.

What this proposed amendment to Senator Moore's amendment seeks to do is bring forward reporting dates. We are not averse to committees of the Senate examining legislation, as is their role; what we are proposing is timeframes which will facilitate the consideration of this legislation in such a way as to give effect to budget measures, some of which are time critical and commence on 1 July.

It is often the case, with the budget being in May and measures that are often proposed to commence on 1 July, that there is a fairly tight time frame between budget night when bills need to be considered and when they need to take effect. That is a function of the fact that we have May budgets and measures that often commence on 1 July. I would indicate that the time frame we are proposing for consideration of legislation is in fact longer than was often the case under the previous government where there were often very constrained time frames imposed on Senate committees to consider legislation in circumstances where they were not time-critical. I think it is entirely reasonable that there be the time frames, as proposed in my amendment, for consideration of legislation by Senate committees. It is not to seek to deny the role and responsibility of Senate committees to do their work, but it is a function of the fact that we have May budgets and often July commencement for legislation, and sometimes that work has to happen in a short time frame.

I also want to draw attention to the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool legislation. This is an attempt by the Australian government to establish a payment scheme for supported employees, many of whom would have intellectual disability, who are in Australian Disability Enterprises and who previously had their wages assessed under the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool. There is a recognition that a new assessment tool needs to be found, but it is also important that supported employees, who had their wages assessed under the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool previously, have the opportunity for some certainty as to funds which they may be owed, and also for those disability enterprises who employ them to have some certainty as to how that might happen. It is important for disability enterprises and it is important for supported employees that there be a scheme in place, arrangements in place, so that they know what their options are, and it is important that that happens sooner rather than later. That is why we are proposing a time frame for consideration of the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool payment scheme legislation that can accommodate that objective.

The government believe that the time frames that are proposed here are reasonable in the circumstances. I would commend my amendment to Senator Moore's amendment to the chamber.

Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It comes as no surprise that the Greens will not support the amendment to the amendment. We will be supporting the amendment moved by Senator Moore. These dates and time frames that the government wants to put on the consideration of these bills is entirely unreasonable.

Let me first turn to the social security measures bills Nos 1 and 2. These amendments bring in the most fundamental changes to the delivery of social security in this country that we have seen for a very long time. When does the government want the community affairs committee to report on them? By Monday. The government will know very well that the community affairs committee have a double hearing on Friday. In other words, we would not even be able to hold a hearing to consider these amendments, let alone be able to contact the dozens or more stakeholders. I am just thinking of some of the peak organisations and community organisations that are going to want to comment on this, let alone individuals who are going to want to comment. We would never be able to get that evidence.

Let me frame what this legislation is bringing in. One of the measures it is bringing in is dropping thousands and thousands of young people under the age of 30 off income support. How long does this government want us to talk about it? Well, no time, because we will have no time to hold a committee hearing. They want us to report on this on Monday. That is four days away. It is entirely unreasonable. That is not even considering all the other measures—the change to family tax benefits, the change to portability on DSP. You name it, with the changes this government want to make, which fundamentally change our community, they want us to consider in less than four days. That is unreasonable.

Then there is the change to BSWAT. Yes, I entirely agree that we need to be working on that. In fact I have made comment on it in both estimates and in this place. Yes, it is a very sensitive issue, which is exactly why we need to consult. I know that Senator Moore has had contact from stakeholders, as have I, saying that they have not been consulted and they are very worried. They want some time to consider this legislation because it is important legislation. It is very important that the people who have been underpaid as a result of BSWAT get some payment and that we get a new tool. I entirely agree with the government on that one. However, the government have given us, generously, only one extra day to report on that one. Again, when is the community affairs committee going to be able to hold a hearing? It is beyond me. They want us to report that on the 24th. That is, again, unreasonable when you consider the impact that it is going to have. Is the legislation the government are proposing actually reasonable? Is it fair? Is it actually going to provide the sorts of payments that people think are adequate, bearing in mind that this is still a very live issue in the community?

In terms of ARENA and the reporting date for that is unreasonable as well. ARENA is a very important organisation that this government, because they are climate deniers, just want to get rid of as soon as possible. We know what their agenda is. The community and stakeholders, again, need time to adequately consider that legislation.

I will go back to the social security changes, because it really just boggles my mind that the government think it is reasonable to make changes. They will have had as many emails, phone calls and messages as, if not more than, we have had about the unreasonableness of these measures. This legislation also changes the indexation for single parents. Not only have this government attacked single parents, but here they are trying to rush through, by next Monday, an inquiry. It would take an inquiry into the measures that just affect single parents, given what they have already done to them. They are removing the education supplement and changing indexation. Again, these are all complex measures that we have not had time to adequately look at, because, as I said in this place earlier this week, in estimates, departments were not able to give us the details around these measures because some of it they are still making up. So what they are asking us to do is have a completely nonsense time period to consider these measures when they are not even able to tell us how these processes and these measures are going to operate. We will be supporting Senator Moore's original amendment because we think that is a fairer time frame to consider what are unreasonable measures.

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

The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Fifield be agreed to.

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

The question now is that the amendment moved by Senator Moore be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

Original question, as amended, agreed to.