Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Government Services, Senator Ruston. Yesterday, the minister failed to tell the Senate the exact date on which the government first became aware that robodebt was not valid. On what date did the government first become aware that Mr Morrison's robodebt scheme was not valid?

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

I thank Senator Wong for her question. I've had the opportunity since yesterday to consider the question that was asked of me by Senator Gallacher. I reject the premise of the question, because at no time has there been a finding that the income compliance program was not valid.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They're your words! You said 'not valid'!

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

Order! Senator Wong, you've got the opportunity—

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

Senator Wong, you are wrong.

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

Senator Wong, you've got an opportunity to ask a supplementary question. I believe the minister has concluded her answer. Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Yesterday, the minister used those precise words: 'not valid'.

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sorry, you're right, it was on Monday. On Monday, you used precisely those words. I again ask the minister: on which date did the government first become aware that the scheme was not valid? I also ask the minister: how long did it take between that knowledge and the ceasing of issuing of debt? (Time expired)

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

I want make sure that we are very, very clear. On Monday, I rose in this place and I referred to income averaging as the method of debt collection. I have never said—and I was verballed by Senator Gallacher yesterday—that the income compliance program was not valid. They are very, very different things, Senator Wong. I will stand by my comments. If those opposite decide to review what has actually been said in this place, they would see that I did not say what I was verballed and suggested to have said by Senator Gallacher. On that basis, there has never been any finding that the income compliance program was not valid.

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

Senator Wong, a final supplementary question?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My supplementary question is this: the minister has maintained that the government acted 'very quickly' and acted 'immediately'.

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm quoting her; that's not verballing. I'll take that interjection. Given it has taken 76 AAT decisions over two years, hundreds of secret rejected AAT appeals and the suffering of thousands of Australians, how can the minister stand by her statement that the government acted immediately?

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

I will stand by my comments that the government acted quickly, and I will reiterate the fact that, upon finding and being made aware that income averaging was not a valid means by which to generate a debt, the government acted almost straightaway—

Senator O'Neill interjecting—

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

Order, Senator O'Neill!

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

to make sure that we ceased that program and subsequently put in place a program to ensure that those people who had debts—

Senator O'Neill interjecting—

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

Senator O'Neill! Senator O'Neill! Senator O'Neill! Order! Please resume your seat, Senator Ruston. Senator O'Neill, when I call you to order five times consecutively, you shouldn't keep counting. Senator Ruston, please continue.

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

What I will also tell this place is that on 19 November 2019 the government announced that, going forward, it would seek additional proof points when raising a debt. On 29 May this year, the government announced it would refund and zero approximately 470,000 debts raised by using income averaging. As of 30 November nearly all of those people have had their refunds completed.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.