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

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, Senator Fifield. I refer to the minister's statement to the chamber that 'The government remains committed to all of its social services budget measures.' Does the government still remain committed to all 2014-15 budget measures, including cutting the indexation of the age pension?

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

I thank Senator Moore for her question. As Minister Morrison has indicated on many occasions, all of the government's budget measures remain on the table. What that means is that the minister is very open to propositions from colleagues in this place or the other place who think that we can achieve good outcomes in a different way. But, obviously, any colleague who brings forward a proposition needs to have that proposition costed and to make sure that they can identify how it would be funded. So I think Minister Morrison has been very clear—and particularly clear in his recent Press Club address—that he is keen to engage with colleagues from all parties on achieving the government's stated budget objectives. But let me state again: those budget measures do remain on the table.

I want to make absolutely crystal clear that the proposition put forward by those opposite that this side of the chamber is desiring in any way, shape or form to cut pensions is wrong. Pensions, under the government's propositions in the last budget, will continue to increase. That is the clear proposition of this side of politics. Any suggestion that pensions will be cut is completely and absolutely wrong. They have increased and will continue to increase twice a year.

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Following on from the assistant minister's answer, I refer to comments by the CEO of Council on the Ageing, Mr Ian Yates, who said that—and these are his words—if the government cuts the indexation rate of the pension, full pensioners would be living well below the poverty line. Is Mr Yates correct?

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

As was indicated in the budget and, indeed, in the MYEFO, and also in the Intergenerational report, the intent of this government is to see pensions put on a sustainable footing. It is our hope that, in the future when the budget is in a better and stronger position, it will be possible to revisit the matter of the indexation that is related to pensions. As I say, that is something that was made clear in the Intergenerational report. It was something that was made clear in MYEFO. Let me read from page 32 of MYEFO:

Once the Budget returns to a surplus of 1 per cent of GDP, there will be more capacity to revisit the level of government support provided to groups such as age pensioners, while having regard to other factors such as the ageing population and a maturing superannuation system.

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

Mr President, I ask a final supplementary question. I refer to the Prime Minister who said that indexing the pension to CPI is—and I quote—'perfectly reasonable'. Does the minister agree that it is perfectly reasonable to cut the indexation rate of pensions which would see pensioners living well below the poverty line?

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

I have two points in response. Minister Morrison has made clear that he is very happy to discuss the concept of an adequacy review of the pension every three years, and that is something that he is very open to discuss with colleagues in this place. The other point I should make is that, despite the scaremongering of those opposite, age pensioners will keep the energy supplement, formerly the clean energy supplement, and they will continue to receive the pension supplement and pensioners will also benefit from the abolition—which has happened, thank goodness—of the carbon tax. What we have done on this side of the chamber—

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

Pause the clock. Senator Moore, a point of order.

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

A point of order, Mr President, on the particular question. I note the information the minister has been sharing, and I appreciate that, but the particular question was about the cut to the indexation rate, and the minister has not addressed that part of the question.

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

Thank you, Senator Moore. I remind the minister he has 20 seconds in which to answer the question. Minister.

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

Thank you, Mr President. We have ensured, on this side, that pensioners are better off because we abolished the carbon tax which benefits pensioners, but we kept the compensation that had previously been put in place. So, pensioners are unequivocally better off. As I made clear, we do hope in the future, according to the IGR and the midyear review, to revisit this issue. (Time expired)