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

I move:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that the Australian Greens have introduced the Coronavirus Economic Support and Recovery (No-one Left Behind) Bill 2020, which is a Bill for an Act to provide for a coronavirus economic support and recovery fund, amend the law relating to social security and expand eligibility for the JobKeeper scheme, and for related purposes, and

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) make sure that no-one is left behind by the coronavirus health and economic crisis,

(ii) expand the COVID-19 supplement to recipients of the Disability Support Pension and Carer Payment,

(iii) expand JobSeeker to people on temporary visas,

(iv) expand the JobKeeper scheme to include:

(A) all casual employees,

(B) employees who hold temporary visas,

(C) intermittent workers,

(D) higher education providers, and

(E) entities owned by foreign governments who are resident in Australia, and

(v) invest in:

(A) a $2.3 billion recovery package for the arts and entertainment sector,

(B) a $12 billion manufacturing fund,

(C) a $6 billion electricity transmission fund, and

(D) a $2 billion grant to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.

I'll just outline what this motion is about first. First off, it's noting the bill that the Greens have introduced, the Coronavirus Economic Support and Recovery (No-one Left Behind) Bill 2020.

This bill is for an act to provide for a coronavirus economic support and recovery fund. It amends the laws relating to social security and expands eligibility for the JobKeeper scheme and for related purposes. Then we go on to call on the government to make sure that no-one is left behind by the coronavirus health and economic crisis, that we expand the COVID-19 supplement to recipients of the disability support pension and the carer pension and expand jobseeker to people on temporary visas. We also want to make sure that the JobKeeper scheme is expanded to include all casual employees, not just those that have been working with the same employer for 12 months. We want to make sure that employees who hold temporary visas are looked after and not left behind. We want to make sure that intermittent workers are not left behind and neither are higher education providers and also that employees of entities that are owned by foreign governments and that are resident in Australia are not left behind.

We need to make sure that we are investing in a recovery package for the arts sector, which still has not been supported. I'm wondering: has the Prime Minister used the word 'art' when he talks about the impacts on our economy? We want to make sure that there's money invested in a manufacturing fund—$12 billion. We want to make sure that $6 billion is invested in an electricity transmission fund and $2 billion is invested in grants to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. All those things are absolutely essential to ensuring that no-one is left behind.

I'd like to remind the chamber that on 29 May, late on that Friday afternoon, when you release all the bad information, the Treasurer made the announcement about robodebt and the refunds of those illegal debts. But on 22 May the Treasurer announced that the JobKeeper program would cost $6 billion less than expected. While originally estimated to cost $130 billion over 2019-20 and 2020-21, it was now estimated it would be closer, in fact, to $70 billion. This was due to a revision down of the numbers of eligible workers from 6.5 million to 3.5 million. The government has not committed to reinvesting that money; in fact, they have attempted to celebrate this underspend as it will mean the Commonwealth will go into less debt. However, I will note that they had originally thought that $130 billion was necessary to invest in our community and economy.

We now have the perfect opportunity to re-allocate that $60 billion underspend both to stop people being left behind in the crisis and to invest in the recovery. We can also link this to the need to make sure that, when we're investing in the recovery, we are actually investing in renewable energies, in the transformation that we know we need to make to address that other global crisis: climate change.

As I've said, this bill invests in a number of key areas. It invests in ensuring that no-one is left behind. We want to make sure that people who missed out on the supplement—those on disability support pension carer payment—actually get access to that supplement. We want to make sure that it is available to temporary visa holders, many of whom at the moment basically have to rely on emergency relief and have no money coming in. I have heard many accounts from many people who are stuck here. When the Minister for Finance, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer say 'go home', they can't actually get home. Yes, they made a commitment to support themselves when they came to this country, but that was before this crisis. It was before we had lost so many jobs. As a caring community, we expect that we would look after these people.

As I said, we also need to invest in the arts and entertainment industry, and in manufacturing, but we want to see green manufacturing. We want to invest in new electricity transmission infrastructure and in our Australian Renewable Energy Agency. A number of my colleagues will address some significant parts of this particular need to invest in these additional resources, but I particularly want to address the issue of those who have missed out on the supplement—in particular, those on the disability support pension and those receiving the carer payment.

DSP and carer payment recipients have been excluded from the $550 per week supplement. They've been omitted on purpose. The government claims that they didn't extend the coronavirus supplement to people on these payments because they don't face the same financial burdens. That is just a complete and utter fallacy. If anything, disabled people and carers have experienced increased costs throughout this pandemic. A recent survey conducted by People with Disability Australia found that 91 per cent of respondents reported increased expenses over the last two months, mostly related to groceries and food, health care, internet, phone, and hygiene and sanitising equipment. Disabled people are being forced to make difficult choices between buying medication and PPE or putting food on the table. It is well recognised that 50 per cent of disabled people already live below the poverty line. Now, in the midst of this coronavirus pandemic, additional costs are further entrenching poverty levels and causing stress and anxiety for disabled people and carers.

The government's other excuse for not extending the supplement to these payment recipients is that they don't face the same paid employment impacts as those on jobseeker or youth allowance. Again, this is another fallacy. This is incredibly hypocritical, coming from a government that is constantly trying to force disabled people into work, to the point where it tries to keep them off the disability support pension. Look no further than the program of support which forces disabled Australians to try to find work before they can qualify for the DSP. The government has also had no qualms about requiring disabled Australians to undertake mutual obligations, the phasing back in of which started this week.

We know that many disabled Australians do in fact work and have lost employment opportunities as a result of the recession and the pandemic. For example, the People with Disability Australia survey found that 66 per cent of people had seen changes to their income during the pandemic. People also reported losing their jobs and working fewer hours. Others have had to leave their jobs because they were considered vulnerable.

My office has received countless emails and phone calls from people on the DSP and the carer payment who are feeling totally abandoned and forgotten by this government. Here is what one carer who contacted us said: 'I'm a carer and just spent a week in hospital with my son—a lot longer than usually necessary because of complications with his medical device. The complications with the device produced similar symptoms to COVID-19, which meant extra days in hospital, which meant extra money spent. Hospital stay expenses add up really fast, living off expensive hospital takeaway as your only option with a sick child you can't leave and having to buy clothes, toiletries and essential items from the nearest shopping centre to get through because we live a long way from the closest hospital that can treat us.' Another person said: 'It is unfair, and discrimination to exclude DSP carers and seniors out of a big stimulus package, considering these people have higher living expenses already. They say our situation hasn't changed, but, if that's the case, why am I heading out for a fourth time this week to get some simple grocery items? Or why am I forced to pay 100 per cent more just to get simple medical supplies as everybody has nothing?'

The World Health Organization has specifically recommended that governments should undertake targeted measures for people with disability and their support networks during this pandemic, including financial compensation for families and caregivers supporting loved ones. I find it deeply distressing that the government is yet again refusing to listen to the community or the experts and not providing adequate support to disabled people and carers. I am sick of the government leaving out entire groups of Australians—leaving them behind. This is a time when we should be sharing and caring for each and every Australian needing additional support as they struggle to make ends meet during a crisis.

We should also be supportive and caring for the people who have got stuck here and can't get home. We are a caring and compassionate nation—supposedly! So why are we leaving people behind? I strongly believe that the way to remedy this injustice is to provide the coronavirus supplement to disabled people and carers, and those others who I have spoken about, such as those on visas. Extending the supplement to these payment recipients recognises that these people will need support. They need more support; people with disability and carers need more support as we move into the recovery period. Disabled people will need to self-isolate and socially distance for longer periods as restrictions are eased, bearing additional costs.

Finally, I'd like to add a big shout out to the disabled Australians and carers who have been campaigning for a better outcome. They've been campaigning for justice—for additional payments to meet their needs. To those disabled Australians and carers: you have demonstrated resilience, strength and compassion. Thank you for your efforts to continue to fight for justice. We will continue to support your call to get access to the supplement, to meet your needs and to ensure that you are not left behind.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against the motion moved by Senator Siewert. The motion asks the Senate to note a bill that they've introduced, and also lays out a series of alternative spending priorities that it seeks the government to adopt. In my view, there is a part of this motion which is missing, and that's a congratulations—or at least, an acknowledgement—of the stewardship of the Australian economy by the coalition government. If it hadn't been so wise and diligent we wouldn't have had the money, or the funds or the community wealth for all of us here—and, in particular, the Greens—to muse over how to spend it.

It's worth reflecting on the unique circumstances that the coalition government has found itself in. It had to make very difficult decisions in a compressed time frame in a period of great uncertainty. I'll take this opportunity to commend the Prime Minister and his cabinet on their outstanding efforts—efforts which have been able to manoeuvre our economy into an excellent place from which it can recover and thrive. I also remind honourable senators that we still live in very uncertain times. We risk another wave of infection and associated greater economic costs—especially so with the potential for widespread infections following the protests, which, I add, the Greens support. It seems a little incongruent to me to support large-scale public gatherings at the same time as contemplating in this place how to spend the money paid for by hardworking Australians, who are at risk of a further wave of infection.

All the coalition's decisions have been grounded on its values. We want Australians to live happy, healthy and fulfilling lives, to have an opportunity for personal growth and to fulfil their aspirations. To achieve this, Australians need to have employment opportunities. Employment opportunities derive only from a strong economy. What we do agree with the Greens on is that we do not want to leave any Australian behind. We want to make sure that every Australian has an abundance of pathways to a happy life.

This motion also does not address the role of the states and territories in delivering assistance to their citizens. Each state and territory has an equal obligation in respect of their own community. We must be mindful of the burden we leave for future generations. They need to be considered in this debate. And we need the Greens to tell us what burden our youth will carry if these measures are implemented and parliament passes the bill. What the motion also does not address is who misses out if these suggestions are implemented. This is a luxury of parties not in government. In government you have to take into account all Australians and make difficult decisions that balance competing interests and objectives. What services will be cut to pay for these initiatives? Future generations and our youth will want to know. We cannot go on and restore our economic fortunes as though we were the god of wealth, Plutus, who was blinded by Zeus. We can see. We have the ability to make judgements. As a coalition we've made considered decisions for the benefit of all Australians.

As I indicated, the Greens motion goes through a number of spending priorities, and I'd like to point out to honourable senators that the coalition government has provided $259 billion, which equates to 13.3. per cent of GDP, to support Australian workers, households and businesses. It's important to note that the government has nearly doubled jobseeker for those who are not eligible for JobKeeper. In relation to those who are receiving social security payments, as of 6 May over $5.1 billion has been paid to more than 6.8 million Australians. From 30 July a further economic support payment of $750 will be paid to approximately five million Australians, including 3.4 million pensioners, 800,000 family tax benefit recipients, 170,000 carer allowance recipients, 230,000 recipients of veteran payments and Gold Card holders, and 375,000 Commonwealth Senior Health Card holders.

The honourable senator who moved the motion made particular reference to those on temporary visas. The Australian government is prioritising Australians and permanent residents—and rightly so. The JobKeeper program is designed to maintain links between employees and employers. This program is designed to keep Australians in jobs for the long term. The Australian government welcomes temporary visas and has, in addition, made a number of changes to help them, including access to their Australian superannuation and more-flexible visa conditions. Welfare assistance may also be available to other temporary visa holders if they face significant financial hardship. Supplementary benefits, such as rent assistance, may also be paid. The government has announced $200 million to expand community services to support vulnerable people, which includes assistance for paying bills and buying other essentials, such as food, clothing and petrol.

I now wish to come to higher education, which is referred to in the motion that's being moved. The government has committed to providing universities with $18 billion this year. The government is also guaranteeing the Commonwealth Grant Scheme and other funding streams for higher education providers at their current levels for the rest of 2020, and 2020 performance based funding for public universities will also be guaranteed. Universities can be eligible for JobKeeper in the same way that not-for-profits are.

I will now turn to arts and entertainment, which was the subject of much debate earlier today in this place. Two hundred of the largest Australian council funded arts organisations receive more than $95 million under JobKeeper. Opera Australia has 473 employees who are eligible. The Australian Ballet has 238 employees who are eligible. The Sydney Symphony Orchestra has 153 employees who are eligible. Queensland Ballet has 144 employees who are eligible. The Melbourne Theatre Company, the Museum of Contemporary Art and the Australian Ballet, among a number of other arts organisations, have called JobKeeper a life saver. The Bureau of Communications and Arts Research values the arts sector at $112 billion and has found more than 90 per cent of people in the sector had employment arrangements that meant they could receive JobKeeper. Creative and performing arts jobs make up 0.3 per cent of all jobs in the economy. Their share of JobKeeper recipients is three times higher at 0.9 per cent. Only three per cent of casual workers are from the arts and recreation services sector, compared with 20 per cent for accommodation and food services and 15 per cent for retail.

The government has announced a $27 million targeted support package for areas of the cultural and creative sector, which includes $7 million for the Indigenous Visual Arts Industry Support program, $10 million to provide crisis relief to artists, crews, music and live-performance workers and $10 million for artists and arts organisations in regional Australia for the Regional Arts Fund. Other government measures for the arts sector include cash flow support, which is worth more than $23 million. Modelling by the Australia Council estimates the JobKeeper payment will make available in excess of $100 million of additional funding for arts organisations funded under the national partnership agreement or for those that receive four-year funding.

That range of initiatives, which is not comprehensive, indicates the commitment of the coalition government to the welfare of its citizens. When reflecting on responding to the motion moved by Senator Siewert, I recalled a quote from an American senator. He said:

… priorities are reflected in the things we spend money on. Far from being a dry account of bookkeepers, a nation's budget is full of moral implications; it tells what a society cares about and what it does not care about; it tells what its values are.

And that is what we are really debating here today. The coalition's values are plain for all to see: create employment opportunities for all Australians by creating the conditions for a vibrant economy to thrive. I oppose the motion.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is clear that too many Australians are currently being left behind by the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic crisis it has caused. Throughout the crisis, Labor has worked responsibly and constructively with the government, but, at the same time, we've not been afraid to call them out where they've fallen short. Our priority has always been to protect jobs and help workers, their families and the businesses that employ them through this crisis. Our priority has been to look out for vulnerable Australians and ensure that they are supported properly. We have fought for those priorities here in the parliament. The Greens know this and the Greens have seen this.

This motion and the Greens' bill it refers to will not make sure that workers get the extra support they need, and the Greens know that, too, because we all know that the Senate cannot introduce bills for the government appropriation of funding. We also know that the government already have the power to extend support to those missing out. It was Labor's work that gave them that authority, and we have been calling loudly for them to use it.

As we move into our first recession for 29 years, it's clear right now that too many Australians are missing out on the support they need during this recovery. Throughout the pandemic and the economic crisis, the government have consistently told us how we're all in this together, how their approach to support the community was equal and how it didn't favour some over others. They more recently told us that they would not leave anyone behind. These are the words of the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, 'We will not leave the vulnerable behind.' He is a Prime Minister that says one thing and then does another. One day we're all in this together and then, the next, millions of workers are excluded from JobKeeper. One day it's guaranteed that JobKeeper will be there to support workers until September and, the next, they are ripping JobKeeper away from 120,000 early childhood educators.

The worst thing about these moves is that they almost always overwhelmingly impact the poorest Australians and the most vulnerable Australians. Either the government are not aware of the impacts of their policy decisions or they don't care. I'm not sure which is worse: an incompetent government or a government that lack compassion? Perhaps it's both. While a lot of their decisions scream a lack of care for our lowest paid workers and our most vulnerable Australians, their implementation of those decisions just scream incompetence.

JobKeeper is a case in point. It's an excellent idea. It's a scheme that the Labor Party, the union movement and workers had to fight for, and it's a scheme which, to its credit, has helped millions of Australians stay in their jobs. But JobKeeper could have and should have helped millions more. The government's execution of JobKeeper was bad. This is a good program with poor implementation, exemplified by the largest budgeting blunder in Australia's history—$60 billion of budget blundering. That $60 billion could have been used to roll out JobKeeper to the millions of workers that they excluded from the scheme, workers who they excluded because at the time they said they just had to draw the line somewhere. Well, they found an extra $60 billion and what did they do? Include more workers? No. They did the opposite and they excluded even more people than were already excluded from the program. I'm referring to the 120,000 early childhood educators who they've just excluded from JobKeeper in coming weeks. Instead of targeting the scheme at those who really need it, they excluded more people. They could have targeted it at casuals who are missing out, freelancers, temporary migrants, NDIS workers, university staff, arts and performance workers, local government employees, the many charity workers who are missing out, international students and so many more.

For months, Labor has been calling on the government to take action and, for months, Labor has been calling on the government to extend the wage subsidy to include workers that they have so heartlessly excluded. We know that the impacts these exclusions will have on people, and their employers as well, will be absolutely devastating. These impacts are happening right now, in real time, to real people. You only have to look at the university sector to see what these exclusions mean for jobs. We know that 21,000 jobs are at risk if the government do not step in to support universities during this difficult period—21,000 livelihoods that Australian families rely on and yet the government seem to barely even acknowledge that this is the risk.

Now we're seeing the results of their inaction, because we're watching universities cut back on courses and degrees, close campuses and shed jobs. There are 400 university jobs that are about to be lost in Geelong in my home state of Victoria and the government is letting this happen, right in the middle of our first recession in almost 30 years. These are exactly the jobs that these regional communities need. Regional Australia needs these university jobs which often help underpin their local economies. We're talking about a range of employees in these universities—tutors, academics, catering staff, cleaners, security officers, library staff, administration staff, ground staff and many more. These are all people who have to support themselves and people who have families to support. They have bills to pay and food to put on the table.

Families will be wondering not why the government didn't act to save their jobs but why the government actively went out of their way to exclude these workers. What is it that the government has against particular groups of Australian workers? What is it that the government has against university sector staff? The irony is that it's universities and their medical researchers, health researchers and other staff, who right now are helping to see us through this health crisis and plan a way out of it for the future.

You only have to look at the hospitality sector or the arts and entertainment sectors to see businesses that are shutting every day and thousands upon thousands of workers losing their jobs. Some of these jobs and businesses could have been saved if the government did not actively exclude these workers, these sectors, these businesses, from the JobKeeper program. But they did exclude them—they excluded so many people, including over one million casuals. I don't know if those on the government benches realise, but the decision to exclude so many people has actual real-life consequences. This is not about numbers and statistics; it's about people, their families and their lives.

Over the past few months, I've been talking to workers who've been impacted by coronavirus and those that have been excluded from JobKeeper—workers like Jason. Jason is a Kiwi living here in Australia. He's made his life here; he's been here for years. But since the coronavirus crisis started, many aspects of the life that he's tried to build here have fallen apart. His employers won't claim JobKeeper for their workers, because of their concerns around cash flow, and Jason can't get jobseeker because of his New Zealand citizenship. As a result, many people like Jason who've come to Australia to make a life are being forced into dire situations, with often their only option being to raid their retirement savings by accessing their superannuation. Jason is a case in point. He's had to pull $1500 from his super and he's really worried that he'll have to access more. If he's forced to access the limit of $10,000, Jason could be up to $90,000 worse off when he retires. How is that fair?

What about Darcy? Darcy has been mentioned in this chamber before. He's been working in hospitality for over 15 years, making him an absolute hospo veteran. He has had to move back in with his parents at the age of 30, which certainly wasn't part of his plan but it was his only option. Despite those 15 years, he has been a casual at his most recent employer for less than 12 months. He's never been unemployed in his adult life but, because of the transient nature of hospitality work, he'd only been technically employed for just a few months by his current boss, which made him ineligible for the JobKeeper scheme under the government's guidelines. That meant that he could no longer pay his bills, pay his rent and be independent. At the age of 30, he's had to move back in with his parents to survive. Darcy said that missing out on JobKeeper was, in his own words, 'gut-wrenching'. And Darcy considers himself to be one of the lucky ones. He knows that some of his colleagues and friends who were employed in the hospitality sector are unable to stay with family or friends—they don't have those support networks. It's a grim reality and one that this government is allowing to happen by its refusal to include casual workers like Darcy in the JobKeeper program.

Then there's the example of temporary migrant workers who are really in the most dire circumstances of all, because of this government's decision to draw a line to exclude them. Take the case of Giovanni. He's a temporary migrant worker and an international student. He, too, moved here with the hope of building a better life, like so many migrants to this country before him. He has been studying for a Master of Education and working 20 hours a week in hospitality, but because of the COVID-19 shutdown his hours were cut right back and he is struggling to pay the rent. His partner is due to give birth any day now to their first child.

Giovanni has spent years in Australia, contributing, working, studying, paying taxes, pay uni fees and being everything that he can be to be a valued member of our community. He put it well, when he said, 'We're not asking much; we pay tax, you know—we're just asking for a little bit of relief.' But the government's response to Giovanni and others in a similar situation was to say, 'Just go home.' How absolutely outrageous! When we spoke about the government's response to those in his situation, this is a man who actually broke down in tears. Giovanni said that this was one of the most heartbreaking moments in his life, because he'd done everything to be included as a valued member of our community. But this government decided to specifically exclude him from the JobKeeper program.

Giovanni, Darcy and Jason deserve to have a government that supports them in times of crisis and in times of hardship. These exclusions from JobKeeper will have contributed to the fact that there are more people on the jobseeker payment than was predicted at the beginning of this crisis: 200,000 more Australians are currently on jobseeker than predicted. And we can expect this number to grow even more, to 1.7 million by September. But what's the plan for these people who have lost their jobs because of a global pandemic, come September? The government's current plan is, as we all know, to snap back unemployment benefits to the previous Newstart rates—rates which are so low that they trap people in poverty and actually prevent them from doing something that the government talks so much about: finding employment. This is not a great idea in the middle of a recession.

We need to be helping to support people while they find a way to get back to work, and that means making sure people can afford the essentials that they need: training, tools, transport, clothing and being able to keep a car on the road. These are not possible on the old Newstart rates. Too many people are falling through the cracks in the government's support, and it sounds like they are going to let the same thing happen to those on JobKeeper in September. This snapback is going to hurt families, it will hurt businesses and it will hurt the economy, and the government has the power, because of our advocacy, to help support these Australians with the flick of a pen.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I go to the substance of this debate, I would just like to address something that Senator Walsh said in her speech. She expressed concerns about appropriating funds. In fact, we're not actually debating an appropriation here. We're debating what to do with money that has actually already been appropriated. So if that's the only excuse that the Labor Party has for not supporting the Greens this evening then they can rest assured that in fact that's not a concern. They can set their minds at rest and, as I said, if that's their only excuse for not supporting us then we now look forward to their support for this motion.

What we do know is that the Treasurer announced, late on a Friday afternoon—when you take out the trash in Australian politics—that the JobKeeper program would cost $60 billion less than expected. When you say it quickly, $60 billion doesn't sound like a lot of money but, believe me, that is an awful lot of money that could be put to an awful lot of good uses! Unfortunately for so many people, and for our economy, the government has not committed to reinvest the money. In fact they are effectively celebrating this underspend.

The Australian Greens have a diametrically opposed position, and that is that this is $60 billion of forgone economic stimulus. We also believe that the government making the decision not to spend this money will massively impact on so many people who desperately need support. There is a range of people who I would include in that category: many artists and creative workers; so many temporary visa holders, including international students; casual workers who have worked less than 12 months continuously for their current employer; and people who work for universities. The list goes on.

But here's what the Greens are proposing: expand JobKeeper eligibility to casual employees, including those casual employees currently not eligible due to less than 12 months of continuous service with their current employer. We also would like to see it extended to employees on temporary visas. We'd like to see it expanded to include intermittent employees, who've missed out due to the fixed 1 March start date and the nature of their contracts. We'd also like to see it expanded to cover employees of higher education providers such as universities, which have been explicitly excluded from JobKeeper, through adjustments to their turnover test. We'd also like to see it expanded to employees of foreign government owned entities that are resident in Australia—the example being dnata, an airport services provider that is 100 per cent owned by the state government of Dubai; it has been excluded from JobKeeper on that basis. Outside the JobKeeper program, we also have plenty of people in this country who are on Newstart and who need to have the rate of Newstart retained so that people are not condemned to live a life of abject poverty. There are a range of really important measures that could be taken by this government in regard to that $60 billion which would not only stimulate the economy but massively improve the opportunity for so many people to actually live a good life in this country.

I want to talk a little bit about temporary visa holders. I well recall the Prime Minister flippantly saying to temporary visa holders early on in the pandemic, 'It's time to go home.' He said it was time to go home, ignoring the fact that, for many temporary visa holders, this was simply not an option at the time, and it remains not an option for them today. This is like inviting some guests around to your home and then, when the going gets a little bit tough, booting them out on the street. Temporary visa holders are guests in our country. We've asked them to come in. We ought to be showing them hospitality. We ought to be supporting them in these really, really difficult times, and the sight of international students forming long queues in some of our capital cities over the last month or two has been absolutely heart-wrenching. These people have basically been kicked out onto the street and left to starve by this government.

I make the point that when, a few years ago, the government cut the SRSS payment, the Status Resolution Support Services payment, for people seeking asylum in this country, when they cut them off from housing support and employment support and when they cut them off from social security payments, that set the tone. The government thought, 'We've gotten away with that one, so let's see if we can get away with it again.' Well, they won't get away with it while the Australian Greens remain in this place to be a voice for so many of those people.

Of course, there are people on protection visas, whom I just spoke about. There are international students, people on working visas and people on visitor visas who may be stuck here either due to a lack of funds or as a result of travel bans that prevent them from leaving Australia and returning to a safe country. The government's response to temporary visa holders in Australia during this pandemic has been cruel and callous. They've been sentenced to poverty, hunger and destitution by a government that just simply doesn't care about their welfare, despite inviting them into our country as our guests.

We'd expect other countries to look after Australians who are stuck over there and unable to return to Australia, so why aren't we doing better at looking after foreign nationals who are guests in our country during a very difficult time for people around the world? There are currently over two million people who hold valid temporary visas to be in Australia, and the government has a responsibility to provide income support at a time like this for those people.

I also want to take this opportunity to issue a warning—that is, and this is plain as day what we are facing, we are going to see a massive effort of austerity from this government. They will say: we need to cut the budget to put it back in balance. Now, let's leave the argument aside for a minute about whether that is actually true or not. But we know we're staring down the barrel of deep austerity because that's the only way the Liberals know. They're going to gut our public services. They're going to turn public debt into private debt for people who cannot afford to carry that debt. They're going to punish people who need support, just as they have for so many years, by keeping the Newstart payment so low and they are going to drive more people into destitution and despair. And they're going to do it despite the fact that so many major corporations in this country who profit so obscenely in Australia still pay little or, in many cases, no tax whatsoever.

We're going to see it, despite the fact that every budget that is handed down contains over $20 billion in direct subsidies to people who burn fossil fuels in the middle of a climate emergency. We're going to see let-it-rip environmental destruction to fatten the profits of the environmental vandals, whether they be the coalminers, the gas frackers, the native forest destroyers. You watch: this public money will be shovelled into those companies and those corporations so they can maintain their obscene profit levels while nature, as ever, pays such a heavy price. We'll see tax dodgers being given more chances to avoid paying what they owe.

Australia, the people of Australia and the Australian environment cannot afford the pain of the looming Liberal austerity agenda. And we need to fight against this austerity because of the harm it will cause to so many people who are struggling, to so many people who need support. There are many other ways, as I alluded to earlier: making big corporations pay their fair share of tax; ending the rampant fossil fuel subsidies that exist in every budget. If the Liberals are so concerned about balancing a budget, I encourage them to force the big fossil fuel companies, the big corporates, in this country to pay their fair share of tax. In fact, I do more than encourage them: I demand that that is what they do.

Because we do have an opportunity to re-imagine this country. We do have an opportunity to make sure that we don't go back to the way it used to be because the way it used to be was so bad and so difficult for so many people. And when we re-imagine what Australia could look like, we can think about what a Green New Deal would look like for this country—a Green new deal which has, as a foundation, respect for nature and significant government investment to improve the lives of people and to start to repair some of the massive environmental harm that has been caused for so many decades in this country, and create jobs, wealth and opportunity for people while we do it.

Those are the opportunities before us, colleagues. Those are the opportunities that we should seize collectively now. Because we can do things better than the way we did them before. The Australian Greens don't want to see us go back to exactly the way it used to be because, as I said, the way it used to be was simply too hard, too difficult, for too many people. So let's work collectively to seize those opportunities. Let's work collectively to make sure that, as we do provide that economic stimulus, it's in areas where we can use those funds, those $60 billion that are now available that we thought we would have to spend but now know that we don't. Let's use them to repair nature. Let's use them to protect nature. Let's use them to reforest and rewild. Let's use them to create jobs, wealth and opportunity for more people. Let's use them to support so many Australians who've done it far too tough for far too long.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's great to be here at this late hour on Friday afternoon and to be able to speak on a subject that I actually care really deeply about. I rise to speak on this general business debate on the motion put forward by Senator Siewert. Like with most debates brought forward by the Greens, I thank her for the opportunity to make this contribution, because there is nothing precedented about these challenging times. We are delivering for all Australians, so it's safe to say that I actually reject the premise of the motion and some of the comments made in this debate. Yet again, when Australians expect more of us in this place, when they expect us to be working together here to get through this challenge and deliver for them, those opposite continue to drive division.

As a government we've put in place the broadest possible support package, which touches every sector of the Australian economy and the individuals who participate in it. We're providing an unprecedented safety net for business and keeping Australians connected to their employer. For those who have been stood down there are a range of support measures that are available. We're ensuring Australian families can continue to pay the bills and continue to, as much as possible, carry on with their lives. These measures do not discriminate by industry; they are the most comprehensive support package that has ever been delivered by government, and the principles which underpin our economic response to the coronavirus challenge are sound.

Unlike those opposite when confronted with the GFC, we have avoided grand new schemes. We've avoided picking winners. We've seen and learned from the lessons of their mismanagement. The actions of those opposite when they were in government and in partnership with the Greens have provided the perfect textbook of what not to do when you're responding to an economic challenge, and we need to recognise that, both going into this challenge and coming out of it, the government has created an environment which has consistently seen job creation. It continued to drive investment and deliver better outcomes for all Australians. And we do this not by penalising industry for its existence as those opposite would have us do; we do this by ensuring that Australians keep more of their own money, whereas you would see that those opposite would rather see us fill up the government coffers. We do this by providing equality of opportunity where, again, those with an ideological disposition would see us do it without creating equality of outcome. This general business debate is meant to be about ensuring that no-one is left behind, but it is a perfect demonstration of picking winners, as they continue to do so.

Now, I don't come to this debate from a position of ideological blindness; I come to it from getting out there and speaking to Western Australian people, people in my home state who have been impacted by this coronavirus situation. I've seen some wonderful stories of how people are getting ahead, but I've also, of course, seen some really challenging tales. One business that I spoke to is actually doing quite well. They're a plumbing business, and because people are staying at home, they're recognising the areas of maintenance in their homes that need to be fixed, so this particular plumbing business is booming. It's amazing. But then you speak to others that, because of the particular nature of the work they do, are really struggling. But the safety net has been there for them and for their employees to ensure that those jobs can continue in the best possible way. I've seen great displays of innovation, ingenuity and reinvention. I've also seen examples of businesses and individuals that, through no fault of their own, have suffered.

Through my conversations and hours of Zoom meetings, I've listened to the impact of the government's economic response. One such business was Alba Edible Oils in Perth's southern suburbs. JobKeeper has had a significant impact on their business. When the coronavirus pandemic first hit, they were deeply worried about what it would mean for them and their employees. Their business is simple. They supply cooking oils to the hospitality industry across the country. They ship these oils right across the country and even overseas. Given that restaurants were closed, the demand simply was not there for their products. It's a classic demonstration of how the impacts of coronavirus have flowed through the supply chain of impacted industries, particularly those that are service focused. If those employees had been stood down, they would have lost that connection to their employer. That connection is critical because this is a unique business. Their operations are unique. There are not many businesses like this in the country, so they spend a lot of time, energy and resources on training their staff. Their staff, they say, are excellent at what they do. Many of them have been with that company for a very, very long time and have built great skills, delivering for that business and for themselves. Losing them because of the coronavirus challenge would have had a significant impact upon this business because of the effort in getting restarted. When restaurants and other businesses started to reopen, their ability to restart would have been significantly impacted if they had lost their staff. Getting them back may have been too difficult.

How I came to be connected with this business is relevant to this debate. They, along with a number of other businesses in Perth's southern suburbs that I visited, were a beneficiary of a Modernising Manufacturing Fund grant. They received $100,000 from the government to double the production of a number of their products. This meant that more jobs were supported and more and more export opportunities would be available to them. Another business just down the road, Beurtreaux, recently received quite a significant grant of $932,000 to integrate advanced technology into their manufacturing process. This company supplies seats for marine applications right around the world—for superferries and the Sydney ferries. In fact, they made most of the seats that are on the Transperth train system. It is an amazing company that uses advanced manufacturing. We're supporting Australia's manufacturing industry to ensure that businesses like this are able to use this period of the coronavirus challenge, when things are slow, to take advantage of the instant asset write-offs, other stimulus payments and other programs to enable them to build and establish themselves so that they can be stronger going forward. We're recognising that these businesses are important for our sovereign capability.

These are just two examples. If I had more time available to me, I'd be able to give you many more examples of businesses that have benefited from the support that the government has given them. You can look on my Facebook page if you're interested in seeing some of those. I've been visiting them and posting details of the work that they're doing. There are some fine examples of businesses that have taken the best possible advantage they can out of this coronavirus challenge. Many of them have been able to do that because of the JobKeeper program, which has kept their people connected to their business.

I've never been as proud as I am right now, sitting on this side of the chamber, having seen what the Morrison government has done. The Morrison government has delivered incredible leadership at this time. The actions of this government have demonstrated real leadership, which was so necessary and which is absolutely vital for us as we go forward. Not everything has been perfect. That's what you could expect when you're delivering a program on such a scale as JobKeeper, which needed to be developed in a very short space of time. From when it was announced through to when it was actually delivered, including the passage of the legislation, was a matter of weeks. What was able to be delivered is amazing. But there were some challenges. We've been working through them. We've implemented a review that's taking place right now, and there will be further things to say about it.

In those early days of the JobKeeper program, I, like many colleagues and others in this place, had the opportunity to provide feedback to various ministers that were working on the JobKeeper program with the expectations of the Australian public and the business community. This was when Australia was venturing into the unknown and the unpredictable in both an economic and a health sense. We really didn't know where this was all going. It's remarkable what Australians and, in particular, Western Australians, have done. What we've been able to do together as a state and as a nation in suppressing the health concern is quite remarkable.

But the circumstances have changed, and the government have continued to listen, respond and adapt in recognition of the rapidly changing environment that we've found ourselves in, and we will continue to do so. Our aims have been crystal clear. The priority has been to get the economy back on track and to get people back into work. It is our singular focus. It is the singular focus of our Prime Minister. We are singularly focused on creating the jobs that are necessary to get people off welfare and back into work. I acknowledge that, as part of this, people from different backgrounds and organisations, and who hold various philosophies and opinions, have come together with that singular aim. People have had to work together. Many of them wouldn't work together in the past but are now doing so. We are a better nation for it.

What we on this side of the chamber—and, indeed, some of those directly opposite—have done is use this crisis as a mechanism to ensure there's unity and to ensure that we can push ahead with what is needed for the Australian people. But, sadly, too many in this place use this situation to push an ideological barrow. I suggest that the Greens, in particular, need to take a lesson from this. This is a time to provide feedback, to work together and to be constructive. It's not a time for grievance and ideological blindness. We know we have much more to do. They would do well to work with us to find the support that is necessary for Australian people.

The same principles which have underpinned our economic strength entering into this challenge will support us out of it. We will continue with our job-creating agenda. We will continue to support our manufacturing industry, to open up new opportunities for them to create the sovereign capability that we need. We will continue with our investment in reliable and cost-effective sources of energy, whilst ensuring we uphold and exceed our international obligations. And we will continue to support people as they get people back to work, along with the businesses who employ them, irrespective of what industry they belong to. If it leads to a job, creates a job or is a job then we will back it.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor's approach to the COVID crisis has been to put the national interest very clearly first. We have firmly acknowledged from the outset that we are in a health crisis and an economic crisis. So when those opposite interject and say, 'What have you done?' we have very clearly put out the calls for what we think is in the best interest of our nation and we have worked with this government as best we can. That is, I must say, having been there back in 2008, the polar opposite of their conduct back during the global financial crisis. I find it just an incredulous statement that when we have this government refusing, day after day, to take responsibility for this nation's current debt levels they signal it as some kind of virtue while they finger point back in time—at the same time as trying to trump up their credentials for stimulating the economy in this current economic crisis.

We have not been obstructive; we've been playing a constructive role in helping the government make genuine improvement to its response to the crisis. I know that the Greens motion this afternoon expressed their own intent in that regard. The government has sometimes listened and sometimes it has not. It has not listened to us, and others in the community, when we have alerted the government to those who are very much being left behind in this crisis. In some cases, the government has not really had its ear to the ground in terms of the way people have been affected, and those people missing out have been accidental; but in many cases it has been absolutely deliberate. We've given the opportunity to this government to fix these problems, like JobKeeper, where the bill that we passed in this place has the flexibility for this government to step up and do its job properly—to get in and help those Australians who desperately need its support now.

This government's very delayed response to the outbreak needlessly pushed many Australians out of jobs and into the unprecedented and lengthy queues that we've seen outside Centrelink offices right around the country. Indeed, there have been overloaded call centres, and this has been a very distressing experience for many. Some of those workers have now come back onto JobKeeper and they might now be in the insidious situation of having to work out how they go about paying back their jobseeker payments. But too many Australian workers have been left out. Too many have been found ineligible for JobKeeper, and this government has absolutely failed to support them.

The Greens have pointed out their view on who is being left behind in their motion this afternoon. This government is failing to support those people. It has had the opportunity to support the 5½ thousand aviation workers at dnata and it has not. These are Australian workers who are supporting other Australian industries but who, because of the ownership structure, the government hasn't supported. The government has chosen to support Rex Airlines, a foreign-owned airline, with a big injection of cash to keep them flying, but it has refused to do the same for Virgin. Virgin is critically important to regional routes in my home state of Western Australia. The workers at dnata are just like any other workers: they're paying their taxes, they're supporting their families, they're trying to pay their mortgages and they're trying to pay their bills. I have spoken to dnata workers in Western Australia about their distress. The government has had every opportunity to fix this—to extend support to them—but it has rejected these calls. Marion Harris from Cabin Services Australia has said:

But please, we're forgotten workers. Look at the people behind me. Look at the thousands across Australia. There are so many airport workers, essential workers. I'm on the front line.

I ask: why won't the government help these forgotten workers—these Australian workers who are being left behind?

There are 1.1 million casual workers who are missing out. They missed out on JobKeeper and, in many instances, if they didn't qualify for JobKeeper—the government hasn't given them access to JobKeeper, because it has deemed they haven't been in their current employment for long enough—then the government has said, 'Okay, go onto jobseeker. 'As I said, jobseeker isn't available to everyone. If you have a working spouse, you're not eligible for either JobKeeper or jobseeker if you are above the income payment thresholds for jobseeker payments. This is incredibly difficult, because the fact is that it is largely women who have lost these jobs and it puts them in the situation in that household where it's their superannuation account that's no longer being topped up and it's their family budget that now has to deal with full fee payments for child care re-emerging in a few weeks time.

The Prime Minister thinks we're going to have a snapback in the economy. There are a few things we absolutely cannot snap back to. We cannot snap back to jobseekers living on $40 a day. The number of people on the jobseeker payment is currently 200,000 more than the government planned—and I note that the government expects this to grow to 1.7 million people by September. So, when you want to snap back, you've really got to recognise that this unemployment benefit is absolutely too low at its previous rate. If you do that, you can be absolutely clear that it will have a jarring impact on the economy because the amount of money being spent and many household incomes will just shrink again as they already have done overnight.

Australians won't be able to afford the essentials to get ready for work—clothing, training tools, transport—or mortgages. The rate of this payment currently called jobseeker was absolutely disgustingly low before the coronavirus crisis hit, and we are calling on you not to reduce payments back to this old rate.

People on DSP and carers have missed out, and this is also an absolutely terrible oversight. We know that 90 per cent of people with disability have faced increased expenses due to the coronavirus, but you didn't increase their payments. Energy costs, extra transport costs because they've had to avoid public transport—all of these things have very much impacted on their daily expenses. They've had home delivery charges, been missing out on shopping at the markets for specials and extra health costs have all abounded. We've seen many people fall through the cracks, and people with disability and carers have been forgotten again in the midst of this crisis. Despite the two $750 economic support payments to people on the DSP, it is a lower payment rate than people on jobseeker when the coronavirus supplement is taken into account.

We know that many carers are also being left in situations where they're worse off, particularly if they're caring for children with a disability. And I note that, while people receive a carer payment, they might even still be doing a little bit of work which they might also have lost in the current crisis. In particular, people who care for children with disability might be more likely to undertake casual work that they're able to say yes or no to, even if they've been working consistently and otherwise would have been eligible if they'd been in permanent work for a JobKeeper payment.

Labor was very pleased to be able to secure changes to the stimulus package so that this government can fix these problems with the stroke of a pen. We call on the government today in this debate on the Greens motion to use these powers to provide the extra support for people with disability and carers who've been left worse off.

Another example I want to draw attention to today is the very important university sector. Again, this government wilfully leaves out such a critical part of our economy, like the arts, watching thousands and thousands of jobs disappear right at a time when we need to be recasting ourselves as a clever and smart nation ready to invest in the skills that we need to come out of this crisis. But you've decided that this isn't important. Investing in early education, schools, TAFE or universities—that is an incredibly important economic imperative at this time. Instead you've taken an axe to education when trying to reinvigorate a struggling economy. I really don't understand what you're trying to do here. Are you trying to ask the university sector to run a marathon with a broken leg? We are going to need to call on this sector to come out of this crisis with the skills, education and resilience that our nation needs. However, instead, because of the decline in international students and the chaos that that has brought, you have absolutely failed to support them with JobKeeper or other payments when you have bailed out other parts of the economy with those payments. Again, it highlights that this government has absolutely no gender lens. The Prime Minister has said, 'Look, we understand that this economic crisis is impacting more on women than on men.' But instead what does this government do? It targets JobKeeper and biases stimulus payments to the areas in which men are more likely have been employed than women. I have no problem with the stimulus going to areas like construction, but I have a very big problem with your withdrawal of support from child care. The government's claimed that it has given other top-up payments but these top-up payments are not the equivalent of JobKeeper. Analysis shows that there is likely to still be a gap with the JobKeeper payments.

If JobKeeper's only supposed to be used where there's been a 30 per cent decline in income and revenue, why not leave them in place? Why not leave JobKeeper in place for those services? If what you say is right and the other policy settings are adequate then these centres won't need to call on JobKeeper. So what's the harm leaving it in place?

This is the party that has endlessly bragged about its credentials in regional Australia. But the minute there were imminent job losses, with a solution in front of you, you have gone into hiding. These are the university sectors right around our country that have supported regional communities right around the nation. Instead, you are at: the free market will save jobs. We have tens of thousands of livelihoods being left behind. It is a terrible state of affairs for our nation. The Morrison government haven't explained to this parliament why a university student working a $100 shift per week receives the full $1,500 JobKeeper wage subsidy while a university worker with kids is not eligible for any extra support.

Here is what you should do: take your $60 billion accounting error and do the decent thing and step up to save Australian jobs. The government has said they would do the right thing and stimulate the economy. Are you going to stimulate it? Are you not going to stimulate it? Are you pulling out or are you staying in? Please give the economy life. Talk about turning the economy on, not letting it go limp.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the outset of my contribution in the debate, and my contribution in it, I'd just like to acknowledge the work of Senator Siewert over many years in this area of Newstart, disability, advocating for some of the least advantaged Australians in our society, and she's been consistent, passionate and vehement about that.

I do detect a sort of more political ploy at play here. If we go back through the work of this parliament in respect of JobKeeper and jobseeker, it was the Labor Party's work in the parliament that provided the amendments which allowed the social services minister to provide support to others who'd been excluded from JobKeeper, jobseeker and other appropriate social security payments with the stroke of a pen. That spirit of unity that we started out on in this pandemic appears to have evaporated. But it is true that the social services minister can ameliorate some of the unintended outcomes in this particular set of circumstances, unprecedented circumstances, which we face.

This motion and the Greens' bill would do nothing to ensure that Australian workers and businesses get the support they need, because, as every senator knows, we can't appropriate finance in this chamber. Everybody knows that we can't appropriate finance in this chamber. So what we really need to do is keep focusing on the areas of concern, and the areas of concern are myriad. There are a number of really important sectors where people are doing it extremely tough. One of those areas, which my colleague Senator Pratt touched on, is dnata.

In a world where Qantas is getting subsidies to run flights, Qantas is getting $75 million to do international relocations, Virgin is getting $70-odd million to do flights and subsidies and they are also getting JobKeeper there are 5,400 workers in the same sector getting zero. I've heard the passionate stories of workers in that sector in South Australia in recent times. One woman's story is tragic but quite common in this sector. Her husband had been made redundant at Christmas and she had taken increased hours to fill that gap in the family income. Then along came the pandemic and the shutdown of dnata. They were promised jobseeker and they were on jobseeker, but with the stroke of a pen they were off jobseeker. Now they are five months into having no income.

It is not easy to qualify for jobseeker. It's fine for people to say, 'You can go on jobseeker.' I challenge anybody to try to get on it. You virtually have to prove destitution. You have to have no savings or anything. It is not just the case that, if you cannot get JobKeeper, you can get jobseeker. Nothing can be further from the truth.

The real intent and good stuff in JobKeeper is connection with an employer. Anybody who knows anything about the airline industry would realise that there are over 60 million domestic passenger flights a year. Up until March there were about 59 million of them and then they almost completely stopped. If you look at the air traffic movement indicator in Australia, you'll see passenger activity up and down the Pilbara and the rest of the place is almost silent. If you really want to kickstart the economy again and snap back, bounce back or even crawl back, you have to keep these people connected with their employer. If you don't do that, they have to go somewhere else or do something else to survive and you are going to incur more economic demise. We understand this. We'll continually point to the gaps and point to the fact that the social services minister could ameliorate this damage.

I listened to the ABC on the way home last time I left this place. The stuff in Bendigo and in the university sector in regional towns is appalling. If you take 400 jobs out of Bendigo, Shepparton or the like, that will be catastrophic to those regional communities. The philosophical position this government has taken to the university sector is quite mystifying. Over the 29 years of uninterrupted economic growth you can point to the education sector, the intake of international students and the fact that more Australians are getting well-trained, experience and degrees in regional areas, whereas before there were low-paid jobs and low outcomes in terms of productivity. With the education sector in regional Australia going well, the whole area booms. We're taking 400 jobs out of those sectors. It's quite mystifying.

You get conservative commentators say: 'I don't know what has happened to the Public Service. There is no accountability anymore.' These are conservative commentators. Someone managed to give advice that was catastrophically wrong. Senator Cormann bats up every day and keeps putting on a fine front and all the rest of it, but it was catastrophic advice they were given. They have the opportunity to fine-tune this excellent program—and JobKeeper is an excellent program. I have seen firsthand it work in a small business and it has done exactly what the government wanted it to do. It did have a few warts in that it overpaid a few people—it gave people who only ever worked one Sunday, basically $750—but that will wash out. They have an opportunity to fine-tune it.

Someone made a catastrophic recommendation and has paid no penalty. No-one has taken the hit for that. No-one has said, 'Look, I got that so wrong that I think I'd better tender my resignation.' That used to be how the Public Service worked. I don't think anybody has ever made such a historically large blunder, and apparently it was just at the upper end of estimates, and apparently the fact that people put '1,500 employees' on a taxation form was not checked. The Taxation Office, I must say, has been extremely diligent in checking every detail of my tax return for every year that I've put one in, and I've never ever found them not to be entirely correct. But, in this circumstance, I really can't explain it.

But it's becoming exceedingly clear: you can use this program, as large as it is, to get better economic outcomes. If you were to let it go till September and turn off the tap, and if you were to try to reduce the people on jobseeker to half of their current income in September, that is not going to have a very sensible economic outcome, because, for once, people on jobseeker can actually afford to buy some clothes and can probably afford to get their affairs in order and get into shape so they can present for a job interview and maybe even look forward to engaging in some useful work. But we do know this: once people are on jobseeker, if it gets to 12 months or longer or if they are in an older demographic, it's extraordinarily difficult to move them off it.

We know that, for lots of people who've been thrown on the scrap heap because of the pandemic—through no fault of this government; I accept that—you're going to have to have a new set of lenses on the solutions. With a properly skilled task force from Treasury looking at this, there is so much work that could be done to get people back to normality. It would tie 4,000 or 5,000 dnata workers to their employer, giving that company the capacity to bounce back, because if, as our Premier in South Australia says, we have no border conflict on 20 July, then I expect Adelaide Airport will go back to where it was, which is flights every hour or every half an hour. I would expect those cargo terminals to be booming and loading and I would expect those people who are currently starving because they have no income and are living off whatever savings they have and off support from family and friends to go back into the workforce. You've got to keep that workforce loyal and tied to the employer, and the social services minister and this chamber should allow the disallowance on that dnata decision. It should be done.

We should be looking at all the regional employment in universities. We should be looking very carefully at the economic impact on those regional communities. If you take 400 jobs out of any regional community, it will be catastrophic. You will set that town back decades. It will not bounce back. It won't snap back. In fact, it'll be crawling back for decades. If you have the wherewithal to do it, you should be targeting, very selectively, the greatest economic return and the greatest compassion. Let's be fairly clearly about this: no-one in the workforce is at fault here. The pandemic has happened. The government has risen to the challenge, but it hasn't been selective, targeted and nimble enough to respond to all of the things that are pointed out by the various groups in this place. The opposition is not bereft of ideas, nor are the Australian Greens. When there is some articulated research policy position, it should be considered by the other side. Let's face it, if it's a good decision, claim the victory and do it. Just move on. Get people back onto JobKeeper when they've been unfairly rubbed out. Look at the university sector and ensure there's no detriment.

Look at those people—and I know a few people who were on Newstart, which is now jobseeker—who lives have all of a sudden been transformed. Those people now have new-found confidence because the increase in the supplement they got has lifted them immensely. I fully expect lots of those people will go out and be able to get employment, because what it takes is a bit of pump priming. It doesn't take robodebt. It doesn't take cashless welfare cards. It's hope you give them. When you give them a couple of bucks over what they've had, they've got hope that they can resurrect things. I implore the other side to think carefully about all of this and put in place some of the genuine things that have been suggested.

Debate interrupted.