Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Assistant Minister for Social Services, Senator Fifield. I refer to the extraordinary open letter signed by more than 60 homeless service providers today, pointing out that, while the government budget is on a four yearly cycle, every front-line homeless support service in the country faces layoffs and closures because the government is refusing to commit to their continued funding. Will the government commit to a four-year National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness? And if not, why not?

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

I think it is important to point out that the previous Labor government not only terminated the NPAH funding beyond 30 June 2014, but it also failed to provide for homelessness funding in the forward estimates.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Ludlam, on a point of order.

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of relevance: if I had wanted to ask about Labor policy, I would have asked a Labor senator; you are the government, Senator Fifield. Mr President, I ask you to draw his attention to the question.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Thank you, Senator Ludlam; Senator Fifield had just commenced his answer and he is putting the context around the question you asked.

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

Thank you, Mr President. As I was saying, there was no provision for NPAH funding in the Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook in August 2013 issued by the former Treasurer. In contrast, the coalition government has provided $115 million for the 2014-15 National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness, which was matched by the states and territories. It is also important to point out that the states and territories are responsible for determining priorities, and retain the flexibility to decide which services should be funded. Mr President, in the short term, future arrangements for the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness will be considered in the context of the 2015-16 budget, while longer-term arrangements for housing assistance and homelessness services will be considered in the context of the white paper.

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for his answer and I rise on a supplementary question. Senator Fifield, in the context of the $115 million you identified, I presume you are aware—through you, Mr President—that that amounted to a cut of $44 million. Will the government be restoring that cut, made as part of the extraordinary cuts to the housing and homelessness portfolio? And will the government immediately reinstate the $21 million it cut from peak bodies like Homelessness Australia just three days before Christmas?

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

As I stated before, but I will restate it for Senator Ludlam: in the short term, future arrangements for the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness will be considered in the context of the 2015-16 budget.

Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a further supplementary question: due to the failure of the minister to commit to funding, and the government's evident indifference to the plight of homeless Australians, can we take it that Minister Scott Morrison intends to bring the same spirit of compassion and humanity to the social services portfolio that he brought to the immigration portfolio?

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

Mr President, I can answer that question in one word: absolutely! But I will expand upon it for you, Senator Ludlam. Minister Morrison, as Minister for Immigration, showed the ultimate compassion and the ultimate decency—because his ceaseless and absolute objective was to stop people dying at sea. And I am so pleased to be able to advise all of my colleagues in this place that Minister Morrison was successful. Because of Minister Morrison's efforts, there are hundreds if not thousands of people who would otherwise have lost their lives at sea. It is a matter of great pride in this government that the people smugglers have effectively been put out of business. Minister Morrison is a man of great compassion and great decency. He wants to see Australians in work. He wants to see people who are facing extra challenges for reasons beyond their control getting the help they deserve.