Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That these bills be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speeches read as follows—

SOCIAL SERVICES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (MISCELLANEOUS MEASURES) BILL 2015

This bill introduces a number of minor 'housekeeping' amendments in the Social Services portfolio – contributing to general maintenance of the substantial suite of legislation administered by the portfolio.

In this case, amendments will be made to the social security law and family assistance law. The amendments will correct technical errors and clarify intended policy by removing minor ambiguities and anomalies.

The measures in this bill are technical in nature. These amendments are an important part of the ongoing management of these legislative frameworks.

One of the amendments in this bill will clarify that people serving an Income Maintenance Period for a mainstream income support payment, such as Newstart Allowance, cannot access special benefit during that period.

An Income Maintenance Period is a period of time during which payments, for example, redundancy or leave payments, are apportioned and treated as income for certain social security payments.

The effect of the Income Maintenance Period is to either reduce the person's payment rate, or fully preclude them from receiving a social security payment for the period that the termination or leave payment represents. During this period the person is expected to draw on the resources provided by their other payment.

A single person without children would be fully precluded from receiving Newstart Allowance if their termination payment is equivalent to at least $1014 per fortnight. This amount is higher if the person is paying rent.

In addition to Newstart Allowance, the Income Maintenance Period applies to Youth Allowance, Partner Allowance, Austudy Payment, Widow Allowance, Parenting Payment, Disability Support Pension and Sickness Allowance.

A person who is required to serve an Income Maintenance Period may have it reduced or waived if he or she is in severe financial hardship due to unavoidable or reasonable expenditure.

Unavoidable or reasonable expenditure includes, but is not limited to, things such as the reasonable costs of living such as food, rent and utilities bills, as well as school and funeral expenses, essential repairs to the home, whitegoods and car, insurance premiums, medical expenses and any other costs that are considered unavoidable or reasonable taking into account the individual circumstances of the person.

Special Benefit is a discretionary income support payment available to people in severe financial hardship who are unable to earn a sufficient livelihood for themselves, due to reasons beyond their control. Special Benefit is generally paid at the same rate as Newstart Allowance but is not subject to an Income Maintenance Period.

However, it has been longstanding policy that a person who is unable to have an Income Maintenance Period for another income support payment waived or reduced, because the expenditure of their funds is neither unavoidable nor reasonable, should not be paid Special Benefit instead, as this circumvents the purpose of the Income Maintenance Period and may encourage people to spend their termination payments too quickly.

This amendment confirms this policy position – people should use their own resources before drawing on taxpayer-funded support.

A further amendment in this bill will realign the time period for income reconciliation for certain Family Tax Benefit recipients. That is, for families who are not required to lodge a tax return, or have types of income not included in a tax return, the bill will introduce a one year timeframe for individuals to notify their non-lodger status or provide income details. This is consistent with the equivalent timeframe currently applying to families who are required to lodge a tax return.

The reduction to the timeframe from two years to one year is also consistent with the intent of the family assistance programme, which is to deliver financial assistance to families to help with the cost of raising children when it is needed.

One year is considered a reasonable amount of time for families to notify Centrelink that they are not required to lodge and/or provide details of types of income not included in a tax return in order for reconciliation of their Family Tax Benefit entitlement to occur.

It is also important to note that this amendment will have very little practical effect on families, as the one year timeframe for to provide income details or notify of non-lodger status has been communicated to recipients since the implementation of the broader realignment of time periods amendments in 2013.

As such, these amendments will not result in any unexpected or unforeseen outcomes for families, as they have been familiar with the rules for some time. However, the amendments will ensure it is clear that all Family Tax Benefit recipients have the same time period to meet the reconciliation conditions to receive supplements and top-up payments.

This bill will also make several amendments to the administration of certain student payments.

Firstly, the student payment eligibility criteria will be changed to remove the current requirement for new apprentices to have a Commonwealth Registration Number. The amendment alters payment eligibility criteria so that the requirements for new apprentice can be determined by the Minister in a legislative instrument.

This administrative detail has proved to cause delays in accessing and cancelling payments for apprentices. For example, an apprentice who is receiving austudy payment ceases his apprenticeship and leaves his employer, but there is a delay in cancelling his Commonwealth Registration Number which means he continues to be paid austudy.

There can be delays of weeks or even months before a Commonwealth Registration Number is cancelled, which means when his Austudy payment is cancelled, he may have been overpaid and incur a debt. The change in definition of new apprentice removes any link to the person having a Commonwealth Registration Number which removes the delay in cancelling payment and avoids incurring a social security debt.

Removing the requirement is a sensible improvement. This change ensures payments are not unduly delayed to new apprentices needing financial support and that payments cease promptly when they cease to be apprentices so debts do not occur. This is expected to benefit all new apprentices seeking financial support through Youth Allowance or Austudy payments.

The change is also needed in light of Commonwealth Registration Numbers being replaced from 1 July 2016 as part of the Department of Education and Training's apprenticeship reforms.

The second student payment amendment is to clarify that only one course of education is taken into account in assessing 'undertaking full-time study' or 'undertaking qualifying study' for student payments at the same institution or across multiple institutions.

This measure aims to prevent students from being supported financially to undertake multiple unrelated courses of education that do not contribute to their employment or career prospects. It is estimated that this measure will affect only a small number of individuals.

It has always been the intention that students are only assessed against one course of education under the full-time study requirements of Youth Allowance (Student) and the qualifying study requirements of Austudy. The amendment will make the law clearer in this area, so that students are not assessed as undertaking full-time study on the basis of more than one course of education during a single study period.

The third amendment relating to student payments is to clarify exemptions from the Austudy assets test for people with a partner receiving a relevant payment.

A person is intended to be exempt from the Austudy assets test if their partner is receiving a relevant pension, benefit, allowance or compensation payment. The exemption is not intended to apply if the partner has received the relevant payment at any time in the past, unless the payment relates to lump sum compensation received as an armed services widow or widower under the Military Rehabilitation Compensation Act 2004, which has been received in the past.

This will ensure the appropriate application of the assets test to the assets of partners of individuals receiving financial support through Austudy payments.

The bill will also make a series of other minor amendments, clarifying and simplifying matters such as the indexation of Pharmaceutical Allowance, the allowable income limits for the Health Care Card, and certain decision-making and delegation framework provisions.

In the case of Pharmaceutical Allowance, the bill will make some small corrections and additions to cross-referencing in the indexation tables to ensure the legislation accurately reflects long-standing indexation policy. Pharmaceutical Allowance, which is added into the rate of some social security payments, or may in some circumstances be paid as a separate payment, is indexed or adjusted each year under Part 3.16 of the Social Security Act 1991. No change is proposed to current policy and practice.

The Social Security Act 1991 does not currently specify exactly what components of Newstart Allowance are to be included in the calculation of allowable income limits for the Health Care Card but current and past policy and practice is, and has been, to include only the maximum basic rate and energy supplement.

The amendment contained in this bill seeks to clarify the components of Newstart Allowance to be included in the calculation of allowable income in a way which gives undoubtable legislative support to the current and past practice of calculating allowable income. That is, the amendment seeks to make it clear that the Pension Supplement, Pharmaceutical Allowance and Rent Assistance are all to be excluded from that calculation.

Nobody currently holding the Health Care Card will lose it because of this amendment. This is because the amendment contained in the bill does nothing more than provide clearer legislative support for the current practice of calculating allowable income. Furthermore, nobody acquiring the card in the future will be prevented from doing so because of the same amendment. This is because in the future the law will be applied as it is currently.

The amendments regarding the delegation framework will remove the requirement for the Secretary of the Department to seek the agreement of the Secretary of the Department of Human Services to the delegation of the Secretary's powers to officers of the 'Human Services Department' under the family assistance law. Departmental officers would continue to consult closely to ensure delegation instruments drafted are in line with the Human Services Department requirements.

These amendments will reduce the administrative burden and the time taken in the making of instruments of delegation under the family assistance law. It will also bring the relevant delegation provisions in the family assistance law into line with those in the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999.

Lastly, there are a small number of technical amendments.

These technical amendments include amending paragraph 8(8) (z) of the Social Security Act 1991 to change incorrect references in the note of the paragraph and repealing clause 49 of Schedule 1A of the Social Security Act 1991. These technical amendments will allow for corrections to cross-references, which will make the law easier to understand for individuals, and will repeal a spent clause from the legislation which is no longer used.

While these amendments are minor in nature, they are worth bringing forward to minimise confusion for payment recipients and stakeholder groups contending with legislative provisions that are sometimes unclear.

Such amendments are also an important part of ongoing responsible management of this important core legislative framework, and within the established policy to ensure consistency and clarity.

WATER AMENDMENT (REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2015

The Australian Government is committed to implementing the Basin Plan in ways that deliver the best social, economic and environmental outcomes for the Basin and its many industries and communities. Water lies at the core of agricultural production and the associated wealth supports regional communities and the nation.

The Water Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2015 further delivers on the Government's commitment to support communities, businesses and the environment in the Murray-Darling Basin. It also shows that the Government takes the opportunities that arise from ongoing statutory reviews to consult the community and respond to their concerns.

The main purpose of this Bill is to implement the recommendations of the Report of the Independent Review of the Water Act 2007, following extensive consultation with state and territory governments and stakeholders across the irrigation, community, Indigenous and environment sectors. Of the 23 recommendations made by the Panel, 21 have been accepted in full and two have been accepted in part.

The Government thanks the Review Panel members – Mr Eamonn Moran, PSM QC; Mr Peter Anderson; Dr Steve Morton; and Mr Gavin McMahon – for their efforts in reviewing the Water Act, their consultative approach, and for identifying a package of balanced and sensible amendments.

The amendments proposed by the Panel support this Government's approach to delivering the Water Act's objectives, including:

This Bill supports each of these objectives, and in doing so underpins the Government's aim of delivering water reform in ways that support communities, businesses and the environment.

Water recovery – background

The Government's approach to achieving the sustainable diversion limits outlined in the Basin Plan is to prioritise investment in productivity-enhancing water infrastructure and cap surface water buybacks at 1,500 gigalitres. The Government recently enshrined the 1,500 gigalitre cap in the Water Act. This provides vital reassurance to communities by limiting any potential economic impacts associated with water purchases.

Capping water buybacks provides greater certainty to Basin communities that the Government is focused on water recovery through investment in infrastructure as a priority to bridge the gap to the sustainable diversion limits. Indeed, the Government is undertaking the most significant water infrastructure programme in Australian history, investing over $2.5 million per day in the future sustainability of irrigated agriculture out to 2019. A total of almost $13 billion has been committed to Basin initiatives out to 2024, with the majority of funds assisting irrigators and communities to make more efficient use of the Basin's water resources in the production of food and fibre. To put that into perspective, this expenditure represents a bigger investment in real terms than that made by the Commonwealth to build the Snowy Hydro scheme. These investments are already delivering very good results from both off-farm and on-farm infrastructure projects, with more than 10,000 individual irrigators benefitting from infrastructure renewal and upgrades.

The Government, through the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, is now the largest license holder in the Basin, for the purpose of sustaining environmental assets.

The Government is committed to delivering the maximum outcome from the Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism. Delivering the same environmental outcomes with less water is common sense and will reduce the impact on Basin communities. We have already seen projects – such as pumps at Hattah lakes and regulators at Perricoota forest – markedly improving our environmental water use efficiency.

There are significant opportunities in the Gunbower forest, Chowilla floodplain, Burra creek floodplain and Lindsay Island for works and measures to deliver environmental benefits with less water. And then there is the Menindee Lakes. This is a great opportunity to undertake environmental works that actually provide more water to the Basin without removing water from productive use.

Basin water ministers continue to strive towards a supply contribution of up to 650 gigalitres. In other words, and noting that over 70 per cent of the Basin Plan water recovery target has already been achieved, the adjustment mechanism will see the 2,750 gigalitre water recovery target fall to as low as 2,100 gigalitres, reducing the socio-economic impacts of implementing the Basin Plan.

Separately, the Northern Basin Review, which is supported by all Basin water Ministers, is re-examining sustainable diversion limits set for the northern Basin in light of new and additional scientific and socio-economic information. The Government is looking forward to considering the outcomes of the Northern Basin Review when its findings are released next year. We must identify detrimental economic impacts as a result of the reduction of water available for agricultural production and determine whether substantial environmental outcomes have been achieved as a result of that reduction.

Efficient and effective management of environmental water

We know that farmers and irrigators are working hard to ensure that their use of water is as efficient and effective as possible, and so too is the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder.

One way in which Commonwealth environmental water can be used more efficiently is through trade. Trade opportunities for the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder can arise when, for example, the annual allocations associated with permanently held entitlements are not needed in one part of the system, and water could be used more effectively elsewhere or at another time. To date, the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder has traded water for this purpose in a number of catchments, such as the Gwydir in New South Wales. This has assisted those communities to finish crops.

Recently, the sale of 20 gigalitres of environmental water allocations in the Goulburn catchment – the first in the southern Murray-Darling Basin – represented a good outcome for irrigators, who purchased over 20 billion litres of water for agricultural use at a time when prevailing seasonal conditions are dry.

This Bill amends the Act to provide greater flexibility for trade while ensuring that the environmental outcomes sought by the Basin Plan are maintained or improved. This Bill enables the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder to use proceeds from the sale of water allocations to invest in activities that improve the effectiveness of Commonwealth environmental water use and help to achieve Basin Plan environmental outcomes. This flexibility will enable the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder to get the best environmental outcomes possible, as efficiently as possible.

This recognises that achieving environmental outcomes in the Basin will often require both water and complementary environmental activities. We know it is not just about adding water, because the lack of environmental works and measures, such as fish ladders and carp screens, can be a real barrier to maximising environmental outcomes.

The Bill also implements important safeguards recommended by the Review Panel including:

The scope of potential environmental activities that can be funded through water sales is broad, but must be tied to improved outcomes from the use of Commonwealth environmental water. This enables targeted investments that complement, rather than duplicate, existing environmental programmes. The Government wishes to make it clear that the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder will not use this new flexibility to invest in natural resource management activities that are already being funded by other programmes, whether at the local, state or federal level.

A further change in this Bill is to bring the conditions on the sale of water allocations in systems with continuous accounting into line with systems which have an annual accounting framework. This means that if water is not required to meet environmental objectives in a water period, the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder will have an option to sell the water rather than forego allocations due to account limits.

Flexibility and practicality are central to these amendments, and key to achieving positive environmental outcomes in the Basin, in ways that also deliver social and economic benefits to Basin communities.

The Government also recognises that there are many other stakeholders besides the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder that are working to improve environmental outcomes in the Basin. For example, the development of a biological control agent for European carp, which comprise over 70 per cent of all fish in the Basin, could deliver transformative change to our most iconic river system. This collaborative work – between federal and state governments, research and development corporations and universities – has the potential to massively reduce carp populations and significantly improve the health of the Basin's rivers and wetlands.

Transparent and effective water markets

In a drought-prone country with a highly variable climate, it is particularly important that water has a market price that reflects its changing value, and that farmers can realise that value through a transparent and effective water market. It is clear that the development of a water market has made a significant difference in helping Basin industries to get the most out of their water assets, and to navigate their way through the worst of our dry times. However, while trade is vital to many agricultural industries, it is apparent there are some concerns within the Basin community in regards to how the water market operates.

In line with the recommendations of the Review Panel, the Government will encourage water market industry representative bodies to establish industry-led self-regulation of water market intermediaries. Commonwealth regulation will be considered if evidence emerges that this would alleviate or remove risks in the water market and provide an overall net benefit to business, individuals and community organisations.

The Review Panel made a number of other recommendations which aim to improve water market transparency. Two recommendations were accepted immediately on release of the Panel's report – a review of the water charge rules and a review of water information reporting requirements.

The ACCC is undertaking extensive consultation across the Basin as part of its review of water charge rules and released draft advice on 24 November 2015 for comment. Among other things, the review is considering how best to ensure consistency in the application of national water charging objectives and principles across the Basin. The review of water information reporting requirements was completed in June this year and is due for release in coming months.

The Bill also ensures transparency and accountability in the trade of Commonwealth environmental water, requiring it to publish details of all water it sells and the purpose for which the proceeds are used.

Separate to the review of the Water Act, but complementary to its aims, the Government is also improving transparency in the water market by agreeing to introduce legislation to Parliament by December 2016 to establish a register of foreign ownership of water entitlements. Foreign investment plays an important role in funding the development of many industries in Australia, including the agricultural sector. A register of foreign ownership of both land and water will provide more reliable and transparent information to the public, participants in the water market and the agricultural sector about the value and extent of foreign investment in the sector, as well as trends. Improved oversight of foreign ownership is in response to a wide public call.

The Government is aware there is some anxiety in the Basin about speculators in the water market and will be looking at further options that improve transparency in the water market.

Monitoring and evaluating Basin Plan impacts

Aside from monitoring and evaluating the environmental outcomes of the Plan, this Bill amends the Act to improve monitoring of the social and economic impacts of the Basin Plan. This is an important amendment that responds to many stakeholders' concerns that insufficient attention is being paid to the social and economic impacts of implementing the Basin Plan. This recognises that community confidence and support is integral to the attainment of triple bottom line outcomes in the Basin.

This Bill will also provide further certainty to stakeholders about the direction and pace of water reform. In line with the Review Panel's recommendations, a further review of the Water Act will be conducted in 2024. Furthermore, the first legislated review of the Basin Plan, previously set for 2022, will now take place in 2026, with 10-yearly reviews thereafter. This strikes the appropriate balance between regulatory certainty and allowing the Basin Plan to be reviewed when its outcomes can be better assessed.

Reducing the regulatory burden

A key focus of the Review Panel's Terms of Reference was to identify opportunities to reduce or simplify the regulatory and reporting burdens imposed by the Water Act. Even small changes in regulatory burden can have a large productivity effect on the many small- and medium-sized businesses that operate in the Basin, leading to improved farm gate returns.

In this respect, the Bill makes several important amendments that will streamline the Water Act by improving regulatory clarity, simplifying the process of water resource plan accreditation and repealing redundant provisions.

The Water Act empowers a number of water agencies to provide and collect information on Australia's water resources and to monitor Australia's water markets. The Review Panel recommended that the Government consider the regulatory burden on industry and water managers in respect of water information requirements, while ensuring that critical information on Australia's water resources continues to be collected. As mentioned earlier, this multi-agency review has now been completed and will be released in coming months. Some of the measures proposed by this review will streamline data collection and reporting requirements, further reducing the regulatory burden on stakeholders and cutting red tape.

Indigenous engagement

Indigenous Australians have a long, rich and close association with the rivers and wetlands of the Murray-Darling Basin. As the submission to the Review from the Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations noted, "water is our lifeblood, and all of us depend on healthy rivers and wetlands."

Accordingly, this Bill includes in the Water Act the existing Basin Plan requirement to have regard to social, spiritual and cultural matters relevant to Indigenous people in the preparation of water resource plans.

The Bill also clarifies that one of the functions of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority is to engage with the Indigenous community on the use and management of Basin water resources.

The Bill adds an additional field of expertise that can be considered for potential appointment to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's six-person board.

For the first time, 'Indigenous matters relevant to Basin water resources' will be a recognised field of expertise that can qualify a person for appointment to the Authority.

Further, the Bill amends the Act to specify that the Basin Community Committee must be comprised of at least two Indigenous persons with expertise in Indigenous matters relevant to Basin water resources.

Summary

The Coalition has a strong track record of delivering water reform for the benefit of the nation. Under the Howard Government, the Council of Australian Governments agreed in 2004 to the National Water Initiative, laying the foundation for nationally consistent water planning and management for rural and urban use, and delivered balanced economic, social and environmental outcomes.

The Coalition also introduced the $10 billion National Plan for Water Security in 2007 and enacted the Water Act, establishing a framework for water reform that included infrastructure modernisation, increased agricultural production and significant environmental improvements.

And earlier this year, the Government announced the establishment of the National Water Infrastructure Development Fund to start the detailed planning needed to build or upgrade dams and pipelines and undertake managed aquifer recharge. This will help secure the nation's water supplies and deliver strong economic benefits for Australia, while also protecting the environment.

This Bill continues the Coalition's longstanding commitment to sensible and balanced water reform that boosts agricultural production, strengthens communities in our food and fibre producing regions, and delivers environmental outcomes.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 115(3), further consideration of these bills is now adjourned to 10 March 2016.

Ordered that the bills be listed on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the day.