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

My question is to the Minister for Families and Social Services, Senator Ruston. Minister, according to the data from the Department of Social Services, the average amount of time someone spends on Newstart is 156 weeks—that is, three years. Why does the government continually refer to Newstart as a transition payment when it clearly isn't, given the average length of time that somebody is on Newstart is three years?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Siewert for her question and can I acknowledge her ongoing and longstanding interest in this particular area. First of all, nobody has ever said it would be easy to live on Newstart. And I can assure you that the government's—of which I am a member—absolute No. 1 priority is to make sure that anybody who's currently on Newstart is given the best opportunity to get a job. Newstart was never meant to be a salary or a wage replacement; it's a safety net. I acknowledge that it wouldn't be easy to live on Newstart; however, this government remains absolutely committed to anybody who is on Newstart. We will do everything we possibly can to get them a job.

The track record that we have in this place over the term of this government—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Siewert, on a point of order.

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

I tried to be pretty specific when asking why the government continues to refer to this as a transition payment when somebody's on it for three years. I'd like the minister to specifically address that issue, please.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You've reminded the minister of the nature of your question. I'll listen carefully. I call the minister to continue.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said, the most important thing that we can do as a government and as a nation for people who find themselves without a job is to create the jobs that they need and then create the pathways to get access to those jobs. This government, the government of which I'm a member, has a great track record of job creation, with 1.3 million jobs created since we've been in government. And we have a plan to create more jobs, over one million more jobs.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Ruston. Senator Di Natale, on a point of order.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance: you've drawn the minister to the specific point made in the question. There wasn't a long preamble; it's very direct. It was: why does the government refer to Newstart as a transitional payment when the average length of time is three years? I ask you to direct the minister to the question.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the minister to turn to the nature of the question given that she's had an opportunity to address relevant material—to be directly relevant to the length of time or the reason the government uses terminology—but she can be directly relevant by referring to the length of time people are on Newstart as well. That was part of the question.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In continuing my response to the senator's question, I was actually trying to draw to the senator's attention that the creation of jobs is the best way that we can get people off Newstart and to make sure they're on Newstart for a shorter period of time. If the jobs aren't available in the economy for people who are on Newstart and who are looking for a job, then that makes it extremely difficult. As I said: 1.3 million jobs since we've been in government and a plan to create more than a million more. But it's not just about creating jobs; it's also about creating the pathways to those jobs, which we also see as a very important part of the government's role. (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Siewert, a supplementary question.

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

The largest cohort of people receiving Newstart are people aged between 54 and 64. Why is it fair for the Prime Minister, as reported, to be talking about an increase to the age pension when a 64-year-old on Newstart receives $287.90 less a fortnight than a 65-year-old on the age pension?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Siewert for her follow-up question. We accept that the most important role that we have—and I certainly accept it as my most important role in the development of social policy—is to make sure that we make the lives of every Australian better. For somebody who hasn't got a job, obviously that is to provide the opportunity for them to get a job. Part of that is in the employment sector, where my colleague, Senator Cash, who's unfortunately not here this week, through her jobactive, is creating the opportunity for people to understand that jobs are being created in the economy and providing them pathways to get those jobs. But also, in the disability sector, one of the things we're doing as a government is investing very strongly in disability employment services to make sure that people with disability have an equally strong chance of being able to get a job and are able to participate in the economy to the level that they want to.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Siewert, a final supplementary question.

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

After housing costs, even with the energy supplement, Newstart recipients are left with around $17.65 a day. Could the minister live on $17.65 a day and still be able to afford food, health care, transport and utilities?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Siewert for her follow-up question. As I said before, in the answer to her original question, nobody is saying it will be easy to live on Newstart. Nobody's saying it would be easy to live without a job. That is why the absolute focus of this government is to create jobs and to create pathways for people who don't have a job to get a job. As I said, and I said it in both of the answers to the previous questions, the focus of this government is absolutely on job creation and pathways to jobs. For people who are currently on Newstart, the promise that this government will give them is that we will do everything we possibly can to get them off Newstart and into a job.