Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 and indicate the coalition's position in relation to this bill, which is that we will be supporting the bill. But we're also intending to move an amendment to increase the fortnightly work bonus from $300 to $600 a fortnight from 1 January 2024, which is, of course, when the government's temporary work bonus concession balance measure comes to an end.

In making those points, I'll state at the outset that the coalition will always pursue well-designed policy changes to ease the pressures faced in the labour market, be they worker shortages or inflationary pressures, and the pension that so many in our community rely on shouldn't financially punish older Australians who want to continue to work. In June of this year, 78,000 of the 2.6 million age-pension recipients in this country had earnings from employment in the last fortnight; for the DSP, 52,400 recipients had earnings, from a total of 765,000 recipients. For both payments, the majority, 65,500 of the aged pensioners and 37,000 of DSP recipients, had earnings of over $250 in the fortnight. Five thousand five hundred age pensioners and 2,300 DSP recipients were on zero rate payment—that is, they'd had their payment suspended.

In its most recent Business Conditions and Sentiments release, the ABS reported that almost a third of employing businesses were having difficulty finding suitable staff. I think everyone who goes out into their community and talks with small business, with primary producers or with any employer would be well familiar with that fact. Regional areas, as well, are suffering from staff shortages as a result of depressed labour mobility between regions and of course also reduced migration, which is in place for obvious reasons. The challenges in finding employees post-COVID was highlighted by the National Farmers Federation in its submission to the Senate inquiry into this legislation. Before borders closed in February 2020, there were 337,800 people working in agriculture, forestry and fishing. In February 2022, that figure had fallen to 301,800. So that's over 30,000, or nearly 40,000 people fewer in that period of time. A recent survey by the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry showed 75 per cent of its members reported struggling to find suitable staff to hire.

Pensioners who choose to engage in some paid employment during their retirement typically have higher incomes and so of course can support a higher standard of living than those who don't. They also gain significant non-financial benefits, including stronger social connections, something I think we all need to consider as important, staying mentally active and keeping physically fit. In its submission to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into Senator Smith's very good Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022, Anglicare noted: 'As well as much needed income, work can give people purpose, reduce social isolation, and foster connection to community.' Pensioners who choose to work during their retirement make a valuable contribution to Australia's economy and to its community. Around 80,000 age pensioners are supplementing their pension income with paid employment.

The coalition had a proven track record of developing sound, sensible and practical policy to address the challenges faced by pensioners. The government has once again endorsed coalition policy by adopting schedules 1 and 2 from a government bill of the last parliament. Those schedules of that bill were introduced by the former coalition government in February to incentivise recipients of the age pension, the disability support pension and certain veterans' entitlements to undertake or increase paid employment. Of course, the coalition's bill didn't progress because of the prorogation of parliament and the election.

Under the current policy settings, pensioners with employment income have their age pension cancelled if their total income exceeds the pension income test limit for more than 12 weeks. They also lose access to their pensioner concession card after 12 weeks. It's quite clear to anyone who examines these settings that they can act as a deterrent for pensioners and those receiving the equivalent Department of Veterans' Affairs payments. Understandably, many pensioners want to work but do not want to lose their pension status and have their pensioner concession card cancelled for earning too much. They also do not want to complete a full application to have their pension or pensioner concession card reinstated.

Both schedules 1 and 2 of this bill, initiatives of the former coalition government, increase flexibility for those people over the pension age who want to work by allowing pensioners to move easily between the pension and periods of work. Pensioners with employment income whose total income exceeds the income limit will have their age pension suspended for a period of up to two years, rather than cancelled after 12 weeks. If at any time during the two-year period their income is at a level that they can return to the age pension, they will benefit from an abridged reapplication process. Acknowledging the importance of the pensioner concession card to pensioners, this bill extends the time a person can keep their pensioner concession card while their payments are suspended. The bill will increase and align the amount of time age pensioners and disability support pensioners are able to retain their concession card to two years.

Relating to the work bonus, schedule 3, both the coalition and stakeholder groups have advocated for an increase to the work bonus. State and territory chambers of commerce as well as the Council on the Ageing, the National Seniors Association, the National Farmers Federation, the Benevolent Society and the Housing Industry Association, amongst others, have voiced their support in providing pensioners with support to re-enter the workforce.

On 26 June this year, just weeks after the election, the coalition announced that a Dutton government would support older Australians who choose to work more by doubling the amount of work bonus from $300 to $600 a fortnight that could be earned without reducing pension payments. This coalition policy makes it further worthwhile for older Australians to pick up an extra shift or work extra hours and help businesses across Australia with labour shortages. Back then, the coalition called on the Albanese government to implement the policy immediately, to help relieve pressure on a very tight labour market. Of course, sadly, as we know, there was no response.

In August, the coalition introduced legislation to double the amount pensioners can earn before their pension payments are impacted and also remove barriers for working pensioners deterred by the risk of losing their pension or pensioner concession card or the requirement to complete a full application every time they become eligible for the pension. Again, there was no response forthcoming from the government when this legislation was introduced. It took the Jobs and Skills Summit for the government to belatedly wander into this policy space.

While we welcome the government's long overdue announcement of an increase in the work bonus income, we said this temporary measure was too little, too late. The government has continued to drag its feet on incentivising pensioners to take up some employment without penalty. Pensioners could have had their work bonus already increased, but the coalition's amendment to increase work bonus payments to $600 a fortnight, which had been passed in the Senate, were voted down by the government in the House only a matter of weeks ago.

The government's temporary alternative, to provide a $4,000 increase to their work bonus concession balance, was originally due the terminate on 30 June 2023. The government finally listened to the coalition—and to stakeholders, importantly—and extended this increase to the end of 2023. However, with this extension of time, more can still be done. Increasing the amount pensioners can earn every fortnight will make a meaningful difference to household finances, and this increase should continue beyond 30 December 2023.

That's why the coalition is calling on the government to increase this work bonus from $300 to $600 per fortnight from 1 January 2024, to further incentivise eligible pensioners to undertake additional hours of paid employment. This increase would commence on 1 January 2024 when the government's temporary measure ends and would be ongoing, subject to an annual review to ensure that these measures remain appropriate.

With regard to the amendment I have already referred to, currently under subsection 1073A(a) of the Social Security Act, pensioners can earn income concessions of up to $300 over an instalment period of 14 days. The coalition's amendment will enable eligible pensioners and relevant veteran entitlement recipients to earn up to $600 work bonus a fortnight and still receive the maximum pension payment. Pensioners will continue to accrue an unused concession balance up to a maximum of $7,800, which can exempt future earnings from the pension income test.

The amendments will encourage and support eligible pensioners wishing to re-enter the workforce or increase their work hours, enabling them to contribute to relieving the skill and labour shortages Australia is so badly suffering. The added income received by working pensioners and veterans means they are better able to support themselves and their dependants, considering the economic climate of increasing inflation and the growing costs of living.

In June, recognising the challenges businesses face in hiring and retaining staff, the coalition announced that a Dutton government would support older Australians by, as I have already stated, doubling the amount of income pensioners and veteran service pensioners can earn without reducing pension payments. The amendments follow through on the policy that was announced and will take, as I have already said, effect from 1 January 2024. It includes an annual review mechanism. It requires a ministerial review to be tabled in parliament on the operation of the amendments.

It's important to make the point that the pension should not financially punish older Australians who want to continue to work. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, in its prebudget submission made last December, noted:

There is an army of older workers with the skills Australia needs who would still like to work, but don't participate in the workforce as it reduces their pension.

In its submission to the Senate inquiry into this bill, ACCI also noted:

Considering the deeply rooted labour market conditions, faltering productivity rates, and downgrades to domestic and international economic growth forecasts, these amendments will end long before the challenges facing businesses and the economy are solved.

I think it's important to take note of those points from an organisation that is well connected with the business community and employers and the pressures they are facing. If they're saying that these measures already in place are going to come to an end too soon, it is a good reason to look to the coalition's amendments.

The amendments are sensible policy that will provide long-term certainty for both businesses and pensioners. They build on other measures of the bill originally and proudly introduced by the coalition before the last election. Again, the amendments will incentivise pensioners to remain engaged in the workplace or to get those few extra shifts or extra hours without any penalty being applied, will provide businesses with an additional source of experienced staff and will provide all the other benefits that flow from being able to remain connected to society and to remain physically fit. All of those are positives. I will commend those amendments when we get to them.

Wendy Askew (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm also pleased to make a contribution in relation to the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. As has been highlighted, the coalition government introduced a similar bill—with, in fact, a very similar name—in February this year aimed at incentivising older pensioners and veterans to undertake or increase their paid employment activities. I'm pleased to note that the government's bill adopts some of the measures proposed in our earlier bill. As a member of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee, I have taken particular notice and interest in this piece of legislation. It does encourage eligible recipients of the age pension, the disability support pension, the carer payment and some veteran entitlements to engage in paid work.

Before the election the coalition announced that a Dutton government would support older Australians who choose to work more, by doubling the amount of income eligible pensioners and veteran service pensioners can earn without reducing their pension payment. Essentially, pensioners would be able to increase the amount of money they earned fortnightly from $300 to $600 while still receiving their pension entitlement.

Under the coalition's earlier legislation, if a pensioner's income from employment exceeded the income limit, their age pension would be suspended for up to two years rather than be cancelled after 12 weeks. If during that two-year period the pensioner's income dropped to a level where they could return to the age pension, they could reapply for that entitlement via, as Senator Duniam mentioned, an abridged process by updating their income-and-asset information with Services Australia. Our bill also allowed for working age pensioners, disability support pensioners and some veteran entitlements recipients and their pension partners to retain their pension concession card for up to two years after their payment ceased.

My colleague Senator Dean Smith introduced a private senator's bill in August to bring the coalition's policy to fruition and help around 80,000 pensioners. In September, Senator Smith also moved a successful amendment to the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Lifting the Income Limit for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card) Bill, which incorporated many of these initiatives. However, the government later used its numbers to exclude that amendment. The bill also included extended qualification for pensioner concession cards and suspension of benefits and entitlements instead of cancellation, as per the bill introduced by the former government on 10 February.

In addition to having a similar name, much of the content within this bill is the same as the legislation introduced by the coalition earlier this year. The first two schedules in this government bill replicate the measures in the coalition's bill and in part of Senator Smith's bill. These measures could have been enacted months ago, so I don't think we need to keep pensioners waiting any longer for these changes to come into effect.

As it stands now, the bill we are debating today enables eligible pensioners and veterans to benefit from a maximum $7,800 increase to their work bonus concession balance, which can exempt future earnings from the pension income test. While the coalition welcomes a measure that allows pensioners to earn more, the measure is only temporary. Pensioners should receive support beyond the end of 2023. To this end, it would be great to see the work bonus increase from $300 to $600 per fortnight to be reviewed every 12 months rather than simply ending in December 2023.

Businesses in my home state of Tasmania and across Australia are right now facing industry-wide workforce and skills shortages which are impacting productivity and economic growth. We're also still recovering from the impact of COVID-19 on our economy and dealing with high inflationary pressure. Last year, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry called on the government to encourage more pensioners back into the workforce by letting them earn without losing their benefits. The organisation backed this up again in June this year, asking the Labor government to consider this important issue at the much-publicised Jobs and Skills Summit in September. Indeed, 36 immediate actions were identified at that event for a bigger, better-trained and more productive workforce. How many have been implemented to date?

Following the summit, the ACCI made a submission to the inquiry of the Community Affairs Legislation Committee, highlighting that businesses are already working at full capacity and looking to secure more labour. The ACCI submission said:

There is now almost one job available for every person seeking work, with 470,900 job vacancies and 487,700 unemployed in August.

It went on to say:

Targeted and ongoing public effort has the capacity to increase workforce participation. With productivity growth over the past decade at 1.1 per cent per year, its slowest pace in 60 years, and the RSA downgrading GDP forecasts to 3¼ per cent over 2022, 1¾ per cent over 2023 and 1¾ per cent over 2024, there is a need to ensure maximum participation.

Yet we are still debating this topic today.

Labour shortages are one of the top issues facing Australian businesses right now. Quite simply, if businesses don't have access to enough workers, they can't run. Let's help our businesses stay open.

All sides of politics recognise this sticking point right now, and we have a good solution. I commend the government for endorsing coalition policy by adopting schedules 1 and 2 from our earlier bill. However, the solution this bill provides will be very short term, not nearly long enough for the pensioners to supplement the income they are watching diminish as they pay more for essentials in today's climate, and not long enough for Australian businesses to reap the benefit of this experienced and willing workforce. We're not suggesting that the work bonus increase becomes a permanent fixture within the legislation, but that's why an annual review would be excellent. That small change would make the world of difference.

Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. This bill makes small but meaningful improvements that will benefit age pensioners and some veteran recipients. It'll mean that people's payments will be suspended for two years, but not cancelled, if people's incomes mean they can't receive the payment. It'll enable people to keep their pensioner concession cards for up to two years after their payment ceases. That's a welcome measure, and we support it. Finally, and most importantly, it makes changes to the work bonus to increase the amount that age pensioners are able to earn if they are working before their pension gets cut.

To begin with, I want to thank the minister's office for their close and constructive engagement on this piece of legislation. The minister moved an amendment in the House of Representatives as a result of negotiations with the Greens and advocacy with organisations such as National Seniors to extend the time that this scheme will operate to December next year. That is a concrete improvement in the bill.

I also want to thank the opposition for their advocacy on this issue. They put forward a clear, concrete proposal that would help people on income support, and we welcomed that. I want to say to the opposition and to the government that we'd like to see some other proposals for people on JobSeeker to allow them to earn more as well. They're on lower incomes than people on pensions, and their effective tax rate, which operates as a disincentive to work, is much, much higher.

Finally, I'd like to thank National Seniors Australia for their close engagement and advocacy on this issue. We recognise that they would like to see further changes to the age pension, and we look forward to continuing to work with them on how the system can be improved.

As we discuss the measures in this bill before us, I want to also contrast that with what else needs to occur—that is, a change to the appallingly low rate of JobSeeker. There is a desperate need for a guaranteed liveable income. The benefits that are flowing through to age pensioners in this bill could also flow through to other people on income support. These same measures included in this bill that increase the income support benefits that age pensioners are able to receive could be extended to other people on income support.

Mere days ago, we saw the collapse of Deliveroo, which is leaving around 15,000 workers without their usual source of income with no more than a few minutes notice. Sadly, we know that many people working as delivery drivers will not be able to access income support because of the restrictions in place. We know that even those who are eligible will likely face hours of paperwork and potentially weeks of waiting. Then, when they do receive the payment, it will be a vastly inadequate one, vastly below the poverty line.

Imagine that you're a jobseeker looking for permanent, reliable work that delivers you a decent income. You get a bit of work here and there—casual, unreliable, unpredictable work. You're certainly not going to go off JobSeeker in order to take this work because, although you might get enough work this week, who knows what will happen next week or next month?

Imagine you're this jobseeker and you've got health issues that enable you to work more some weeks but not the rest. Of course, under our punitive system, you're not eligible for the disability support pension even though you've got these health issues—not that the DSP gives you all that much more than JobSeeker.

Imagine that this week you are able to work. Imagine that you are actually just like the age pensioner, somebody who is able to fill the labour shortage gaps that we are facing in this country. Your health is good this week, and there are some extra hours of cleaning available at a local business. You'd really like to take up this opportunity to pay a few bills, to get the washing machine fixed or to pay off some of the loan that a friend generously lent to you six months ago so that you could repair your car. But it's not worth it.

This bill is giving age pensioners an $11,800 work bonus. They are going to be able to earn that amount before their payments start to be reduced—again, we welcome that; we're supporting this bill—but, unlike those pensioners, the jobseeker we're talking about has a work credit of only $1,000 before they start to have their payments reduced. That means that as soon as they start getting a bit of extra work their payments get slashed. In fact, they are facing an equivalent marginal tax rate of over 60 per cent in many instances. If we look at the modelling of that, for some jobseekers, depending on their circumstances, it's the equivalent marginal tax rate of between 60 and 80 per cent. So not only are our jobseekers who are capable of working some more hours and of working to top up their JobSeeker payment having to scrimp by on JobSeeker and get by on charity or loans to survive but they just can't get ahead. And they're certainly not being incentivised to take up extra work if it's available.

That's the first reason why I wanted to bring the issue of jobseekers into this debate. It's because they, like aged pensioners, are available to take up extra work opportunities as they're available. They should also have available this increase in the amount they can earn before their payments are slashed. The other reason why we're actually debating this issue today and debating increased income limits for age pensioners is because we know that living on the age pension can be a real struggle, particularly if you're an age pensioner who is renting a house privately. Pensioners, when you ask them if they want to be able to earn extra money, say that they sure do, because surviving on the pension is a struggle. They say they need to be able to earn extra in order to survive.

But, of course, as well as this focus on pensioners, we also need to be focusing on the people on income support who are surviving on much, much less. Those are the people on JobSeeker, on youth allowance and on parenting allowance. Jobseekers are expected to exist on $48 a day when the Henderson poverty line is $88 a day. We heard in the debate on this bill and in the committee hearings on this bill from the Australian Council of Trade Unions. They have publicly called for an increase in the JobSeeker rate. We've heard that from the Business Council of Australia, who acknowledged earlier in the pandemic that the rate needed to be raised. And we've heard it from social services and community organisations around the country. These two things go hand in hand: we need to increase the rate as well as allow people to earn more. Most importantly, we've heard this time and time again directly from the people who have been forced to rely on inadequate payments. So I have been sharing stories in this place from people whose lives have been impacted by the failure to act on JobSeeker and other payments. I want to thank them for their courage in sharing their stories; it has been a privilege to try to bring their voices into this place.

I also want to mention specifically that the rate of JobSeeker is an issue that we've heard about from some senior members of this government. When legislation passed through parliament with a miniscule increase to JobSeeker after the COVID supplement ended, multiple Labor ministers said that they thought the increase wasn't enough and that they would act. Well, now they're in government but we are yet to see any action. The now Deputy Prime Minister said in a speech:

The government is in control of the budget and the purse strings, and, in order to change the budget, ultimately we need to change the government. This is a matter to which Labor is committed. In government, it is something we would certainly seek to act upon.

The legislation before us today is a great step forward for age pensioners but we are yet to see any action on a change in policy that would increase the rate of JobSeeker or which would allow them to earn more. All we have got so far from the government is a commitment that was made in the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children, that they would commit to review the rate of JobSeeker before budgets.

So let me give them a hand with that review. The rate of JobSeeker is inadequate. I asked about this very issue in estimates and it turns out that a 'review' actually doesn't mean whether the rates are adequate. It turns out that the review isn't a review. Senator Ayres answered my questions in estimates, and it wasn't 'a review' as a noun, it was 'to review' as a verb. All that meant was that there was an informal discussion between the head of the department and the minister. That review wasn't examining whether the rate was adequate, or whether people were able to live on the payment or whether the rate is so low that it's putting people at risk of domestic violence, food scarcity or homelessness. No, the review is whether the government think they can afford to increase the rate.

At the same time, the government tells us that the stage 3 tax cuts are the Holy Grail of pre-election commitments. They cannot be reviewed, considered or contemplated in any way, shape or form despite costing the budget bottom line $250 billion over the next decade. But, no, we must not touch them. In fact it seems Labor ministers aren't even allowed to look at the stage 3 tax cuts out of the corner of their eye, probably because if they did the right-wing media would assemble like a school of piranhas desperate to draw blood on the premise of a broken promise.

I hope the Labor Party is going to find the courage of its convictions and, in addition to moving on age pensioners, will act on increasing the rate of JobSeeker. We hope that will happen because it will make a crucial difference to the people who are forced to live below the poverty line and are not able to earn anything extra without having it absolutely slashed by the income limits. In the meantime, we will keep calling for a rise in the rate of JobSeeker as often as we can. I will keep raising it in any debate on any bit of legislation where it is relevant because we need it. People are living in desperate poverty. We will keep calling for a guaranteed liveable income for anyone who needs it. Poverty is a political choice. It is a choice that the Liberal Party made for over a decade, except for that brief window when the COVID supplements lifted payments above the poverty line. And it's a choice that sadly the Labor government made in their first budget, leaving hundreds of thousands of people relying on payments that are below the poverty line.

With regard to this legislation, in line with this I foreshadow that we will have some substantive amendments during the Committee of the Whole debate. These amendments reflect the work we were putting in to developing a policy platform before the election. I want to particularly thank the drafters for their incredible work on this. The Social Security Act is a large and complex piece of legislation, and I thank them, particularly given the time frames and the small team that's available. We are putting these forward as substantive amendments because we want to make the point that poverty is a political choice and that politicians in this place, in the way they vote, are making choices that impact the lives of people across the country. The amendment items in the sheet that's been circulated in the chamber set out clear changes that we call on all parties in this place to support, and most important among them is raising the rate of income support to $88 a day. We know that the rate of JobSeeker and other payments is too low, and we know that it needs to be increased. Here today is an opportunity to do that.

We also have an amendment to abolish mutual obligations. We've seen reporting about how these systems have failed to help the most vulnerable and instead have left people interacting with a baffling and at times cruel system. We can end it. We have amendments to provide earlier access to the age pension to help people who, in previous years, would have been able to access the age pension at 65 but now are no longer able to do so. Simply put, we think this could make a huge difference to thousands of older Australians who are eking out a living, surviving until they reach age pension age. This is particularly true for First Nations people who we know face a lower life expectancy.

We have an amendment to lower the age for JobSeeker from 22 to 18, and that, in combination with removing mutual obligations, would make a huge difference to thousands of students around the country. Too many people are forced to study full-time on payments that are inadequate. This would change that for them. Finally, we have an amendment to extend the work bonus to other income support groups. If people can enable those on the age pension to earn more before losing their income support, why can't we do it for people on JobSeeker or the DSP? That is a simple question that I want to put to everyone in this place.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. According to the Department of Social Services only three per cent of pensioners receive income from employment. According to recent reports employers are struggling to fill about 480,000 jobs. Pensioners represent an eminently qualified pool of worker that we could better utilise. Traditionally, pensioners have been rightly cautious about taking up work for fear of how it will impact their pensions. Understandably, not everyone wants to go to the hassle of liaising with Services Australia and risking their pension just to work for a few hours here and there or to work for a couple of weeks over the holidays.

Removing the barriers standing in the way of getting pensioners to take up more hours or get back into the workforce is good public policy. I share the government's optimism that these changes to the work bonus will get seniors back into the workforce at a time when we desperately need them. The changes would give senior Australians more flexibility by putting $4,000 into their work bonus income banks upfront. This means that senior Australians are better able to consider seasonal work, whether that's accounting at tax time or retail around the holidays. I also support this change being implemented as a trial and note that the government has extended the trial to the end of 2023. Clearly, there are a lot of priorities for our social services budget, and I believe we need to be looking closely at the effectiveness of each of our programs so that we can refine them over time and also make room for new ideas. As we move on through the parliamentary term, I will keep asking the question of whether this program is working and whether it needs to be refined.

I want to speak briefly about the amendments that will be moved by the Greens on this bill. I will always support raising the rate of JobSeeker, Youth Allowance and other payments to those most in need. I have spoken about this many times in this place because it's not right to leave people behind. We know that inequality has huge implications for the fabric of our society and for the cohesion that many have taken for granted. Dealing with rising inequality and having an effective safety net is something that we should all support. This is about priorities. We've heard, over and over, how tights the budget is, yet we've seen no talk of winding back fossil fuel subsidies—reportedly near $12 billion a year—and then we see additional ones like $1.9 billion for the Middle Arm project. This is clearly about priorities, and we're not treating the discussion about JobSeeker with the urgency it deserves. I commend Senator Rice for the way that she continues to raise this issue.

Here in the ACT, just beyond these walls, we have too many people living in, frankly, terrible conditions. There are over 38,000 Canberrans living below the poverty line, and that includes some 9,000 children. Reports suggest that one in six children in Australia are now growing up in poverty. That should concern everyone in this place, and we should be working to ensure that that doesn't happen—because we can change that. A recent study by Care's financial counselling found that Canberra households living in private rentals face a shortfall of $100 a week. The cost of rent for a two-bedroom unit in Canberra has increased by 7.4 per cent in the past year. If you're living on a payment, you cannot afford to rent privately. With 160,000 people on the social housing waitlist nationwide, social housing is not an option for most people. In asking people to support themselves on $48 a day, we are asking people to live in their cars. We're better than this. If the Senate is willing, we can raise the rate today and grant kids, students, and pensioners a better quality of life.

On the other amendments proposed by the Greens, I've not had the opportunity to look at them in detail and provide scrutiny. We were provided with them only this morning, and I note that they are not small amendments. I haven't seen any of the costings or analysis behind them and I haven't had the time to consult with experts, let alone people in the ACT. Many of these amendments are policies that I would likely support, but if my support is needed then I need to better understand the benefits, the impacts and the potential consequences before I cast my vote. While I will support the increase in JobSeeker, I will be abstaining from the other amendments put forward by the Greens. However, in doing so I want to say that I welcome more discussion on this. We have turned a blind eye to this for too long. There are so many Australians doing it tough. There are Australians with jobs doing it tough. And much of the talk in the parliament has been around dealing with the cost-of-living crisis faced across the country, so let's not forget people who are unemployed and relying on JobSeeker to put food on the table for themselves and their family.

This is important. This is important for those people, those families, those children who are having to grow up in poverty, and this is important for all of the communities that we come from, all of the towns and cities. This is about deciding what kind of country we want to be—whether we want to be a country that looks after the people who need support to get back on their feet or a country that is willing to say, as one of the wealthiest countries in the history of the world, we simply can't afford to give them a helping hand. I certainly believe that we can. I'd suggest looking at the budget and the $12 billion going to fossil fuels in the form of subsidies. This is about choice, and I'd urge my colleagues here in the Senate on all sides of politics to really consider this. Consider the impact that it is going to have on the future of our great country—having one in six children grow up in poverty. We have the means to deal with it. We can be a compassionate country. We can deal with this. We can be part of starting to deal with the growing inequality that should be a concern to all of us here.

I commend this bill to the Senate. It will certainly help a number of pensioners and will help ease some pressures in businesses across the country. Hopefully this is the first step in looking at social security in Australia and coming up with a fairer system.

Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 will enable eligible social security pensioners over age pension age and certain veteran entitlement recipients over qualifying age to earn up to another $4,000 before the income tax test is applied and their payments affected. This will occur through a $4,000 increase in the work bonus unused concession balance for each eligible recipient and a $4,000 increase to the maximum unused concession balance until 30 June 2023.

For years now One Nation has been fighting for an increase to the age pension and more opportunities for pensioners to earn additional income. Actually, it was just prior to the last election that the issue of pensioners being able to earn extra money took pride of place in one of my cartoons, Please Explain, and it was well received by the public. They loved it. The government is to be acknowledged and commended for adopting our policy. Thank you. It's years too late, but you've adopted it. It wasn't on your agenda prior to the election. Maybe you watched my cartoon, and it gave you a little hint about where you should go to look after our pensioners in Australia.

With the need to increase Australian workforce participation becoming more urgent, allowing pensioners to earn more without penalty made all kinds of sense long before now. A person's utility in the economy does not end at retirement age. The knowledge, experience, industry and work ethic of many Australians at this age are substantial economic assets we can ill-afford to leave untapped. This can be applied to many industries and economic sectors that are screaming for skilled workers.

It is simply better for this nation that Australian jobs are done by Australians instead of outsourcing them to a flood of overseas workers who we cannot accommodate sustainably. We are going to bring over 200,000 people into the country. The additional income earned by age pensioners will largely be spent in our economy and in our communities, especially regional communities. In many cases today it is income that our oldest population really needs given there is very little else the government is doing about their rising costs of living and soaring interest rates. Older Australians will enjoy not only additional income without penalty but also potential health benefits from remaining active in the workforce longer, like members of parliament. They're active in the workforce. This will potentially have the flow-on effect of reducing public health and aged-care costs in the long term.

One Nation completely supports this legislation and looks forward to its passage, apart from the fact that the government are stipulating it's only until 30 June 2023. So I'll tell the age pensioners out there, 'You have seven months at this stage, but then it depends on the passage and assent of this bill how much time you really do have to go and make your $76.92 a week, regardless of the inflation rate of eight per cent, what you are paying extra in rent, what you are paying extra in food and what you are paying extra for your medication.' Oh, no, that's right—the government took another policy of mine to actually reduce the PBS. I suggested it be to $19.50, which we could afford, but the government made it $32. They did reduce it, I have to say that, but again it's another One Nation policy they've taken.

The fact is that pensioners have given of themselves for this country. They are living in poverty. A lot of them can't even eat properly and buy the food that they need, and the government think that they've done a wonderful thing for them to allow them to earn $76.92 a week until June next year. I would like to know what skin it would be off the government's nose if we allowed this to continue. Why are they not making this unlimited? We shouldn't be putting a time limit on it. Why June next year? Why is there a time limit?

We have a shortage of workers in this country. We have known that grey nomads actually work. They travel around the country and do the picking of fruit that we can't get workers for. These people will want to get out to work, but a lot of them won't because of the part-pension provisions that they will lose. Even more important to them is that they will lose their health benefits. That is more important to them than a few dollars. You will gain more out of it because a lot of them won't be sitting in their homes going through depression, not knowing what do with themselves, feeling useless to society, let alone to themselves, and this would give them such an improvement in their health issues that we should be taking it up.

I'll tell you what—these age pensioners are damn good workers. I know because I employed them. How many people in this chamber have run their own business and employed staff? How many? Most of them haven't even owned their own businesses. They have never employed staff. They have gone through the unions. They have actually gone through the political universities and all the rest of it. They ended up here in office and became politicians. They wouldn't know what it's like to be in the real world. They have no idea what it is like to struggle, and yet they are putting these stipulations on pensioners. I don't know why they even bothered in the first place if they were only going to do it for about six or seven months. Why bother? What was the big game plan? Was it to get a pat on the back from people out there that they really are looking after pensioners? I don't see it. It is a great step, but I think that you need to actually get rid of it finishing up in June 2023.

The other thing is that the government must now turn its attention to incentivising the more than 900,000 Australians currently receiving unemployment benefits. The worker and skills shortage demands that we do more to address long-term unemployment and get people who are capable of working into jobs that are going begging. The incentives have already been taken care of. Governments provide generous subsidies for relocating for work, and businesses are offering things like sign-on bonuses and free accommodation.

What is needed is an additional push, and that is: to reduce what unemployment benefits can be claimed over a set period. One Nation's policy is that unemployment benefits should only be available for two years in every five, and not in one straight go. A person might get a job for six months and then can't work anymore after that for another two or three months, and then work for another 10 months and then have a break. There's only two years of benefits.

We might then start to address the unemployment benefit that's paid out to over 900,000 people in this country—people who are now the fourth generation who are on welfare; people who have made themselves unemployable by their appearance, by their dress, but not only by that. We are failing them, as a nation, because a lot of these people can't get jobs because they can't even read or write properly. And we just keep propping them up by giving them a welfare payment.

There was one fellow who got a job and he came home and was proud to tell his parents. His father abused him for getting a job, because he'd actually shamed his father by getting that job. So what he did was: he threw his job in. Is this what we really want?

People have to start being responsible for themselves and their own actions and stand on their own two feet. As Senator Pocock said, people in this country need a helping hand. Yes, they do. That's what it's about—it's about a helping hand. It is not a way of life.

And to both sides of this chamber, whether on the Labor or the coalition side: you have not addressed the real concerns out in our society, because you don't want to upset these people because you're going to lose the vote. Well, until you address this, we're not going to look after these people who are on welfare payments—people who take it for granted and think it's their God-given right to receive this unlimited amount of money. But it's not only welfare payments. On top of that, their health is all paid for. Then there's every other benefit, like rental assistance and everything else that these people get.

But it's at a cost, which the taxpayers have to keep working to pay for. One taxpayer in Australia on $80,000 supports one welfare recipient. If we've got increasing costs and we're hitting $1 trillion in debt, something has to give. You can't have an increasing NDIS. You cannot have increasing childcare expenses—now with $4½ billion on top of it—of $10 billion a year. We can't keep affording this at all.

And yet you are so miserly in your evaluation, to allow pensioners to earn an extra $4,000 on top of it—and only till June next year, mind you. They're not going to be a drain on our society. Actually, a lot of these pensioners would be able to help their families who have their own businesses and can't get workers. They would gladly go and help them and work for them. It would give them some incentive in their lives. And I think that's what's needed.

I think this was poorly thought out. I think you're being tokenistic. And I don't think that you're being fair dinkum with this at all.

So, in addition to making unemployed people more accountable for taxpayer funded income and providing a strong push into the workforce, it would effectively reduce the cost to taxpayers by 60 per cent over five years. And once again, I'll tell you what our bill is for welfare: $228.8 billion—not 'million', 'billion'—a year. That's what we're paying. How do you intend to address that?

Once again, it would put Australians into Australian jobs instead of outsourcing them to overseas workers—or is that your whole plan? Is that what you want to do: to keep people in Australia on welfare so it gives you the right to open up the floodgates and bring workers in from overseas? Instead of bringing in unsustainable numbers of immigrants to address our skills shortage, we must prioritise those Australians who are capable of working but currently are not.

We have a rental and housing crisis and a public health system under enormous demand. Bringing in an additional 200,000-plus people per year can only make these problems worse, not better. It is also completely inconsistent with this Labor government's obsession with reducing emissions to net zero—a phrase they cannot even explain in layman's terms.

In summary, this bill is a good first step to increasing Australian workforce participation—but only a first step. We've got to do all we can to get more Australians into jobs and work and paying their way, instead of propping them up when they're not taking responsibility for their own actions, and putting a roof over their own head. As I've always said: if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day; if you teach him how to fish you feed him for a lifetime.

We are a prosperous nation. This nation has been built on the hard work of taxpayers. But, I'm telling you now, the taxpayers have had a gutful. They can't afford it anymore. The escalating costs due to government policies have put us in this position. Your emissions trading scheme and what you're doing here, zero net emissions, will put more strain on everyday Australians. So take the pressure off the neck of the age pensioners out there. Give them unlimited access to earn what they want to earn. They will pay their taxes on it after a certain amount. And do not put a time limit on it of June next year.

Look after our independent retirees, who we don't talk about. These people have contributed to this country. They have gone without. They have saved and made their investments, and now they can't get any assistance or help apart from maybe a bit of health care. Look after those people who have contributed to this country. But you don't. You're too busy worrying about the migrants and looking after them, making sure they're housed and have jobs and have everything done for them.

What about the Australian people? These Australians have worked and fought for this nation. They have gone without and built the country that we have today. I'm proud to be part of this country and to call this land my own. Thanks to those Australians who have given me what I enjoy today.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. The changes made by this bill are welcome, and I want to echo the comments made by my colleague Senator Rice. It makes sense that older Australians who want to work more should not be penalised for doing so. I acknowledge that many of my colleagues have already spoken to the benefits of this bill succinctly, so, while I wish to speak to this bill, I want to highlight further amendments that we should be considering.

If we are extending the number of hours pension holders can work, then why are we not extending the number of hours that those receiving JobSeeker or the disability support pension can work before being penalised? If we are increasing the number of hours that pensioners can work, it makes no sense to exclude other members of society. This exclusion is particularly stark when we know that JobSeeker and the disability support pension both fail to support Australians stay above the poverty line. The $48 a day that jobseekers receive is not enough. They are income support payments that still fall below the poverty line and must be increased to $88 a day. We must raise the rate. This increase in the rate of income support is one of the most important changes that we can make to alleviate poverty in this country, because, let's be clear, poverty is a political choice.

There are people in my community throughout Central Queensland who are at breaking point because of the inadequate levels of government support payments. For these people, yes, it's the rate of pay that is too low, but it's also the paperwork, the extreme administrative burden, the waiting periods and the punitive punishments for slight breaches of mutual obligations. As Senator Rice foreshadowed, there will be substantive amendments put to this bill, and each one is an opportunity for us, collectively as a parliament, to make people's lives better. It's that simple.

During the initial waves of COVID the government doubled the rate of JobSeeker. This lifted people out of poverty and, quite literally, saved lives. It also showed that it is possible to meaningfully reduce poverty in this country. This government could make choices to scrap policies such as the stage 3 tax cuts. These tax cuts are going to cost us $244 billion. These tax cuts only further benefit the rich in this country, rather than taking this money and making sure that this government's income payments are above the poverty line.

Lifting people out of poverty is only a matter of political will. We need to make and pass these additional amendments to ensure that social services in this country are more equitable and just, and prioritise improving people's lives.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I should just indicate something after listening to some of the contributions. Firstly, Senator Hanson, if you're listening, I should indicate that I listened to your contribution and that the date that has been incorporated into the legislation is in fact 31 December, not the end of June. I thought it would just be useful to point that out at this stage.

This Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 delivers one of the government's commitments to address Australia's labour market challenges through practical and targeted solutions consistent with our announcements at the Jobs and Skills Summit in early September. It strengthens existing incentives for people over the age pension age to take up work or to increase the number of hours that they work, if they wish to do so. The bill also provides that age pensioners and those receiving equivalent Department of Veterans' Affairs payments will no longer have their pensions cancelled after 12 weeks if their income, where it includes some income from employment, exceeds their income limit. Instead, they will be suspended from payment for up to two years. An abridged reapplication process will be made available to them should their income no longer preclude them from payment. Pensioners suspended from payment will keep their pensioner concession card for two years instead of it being cancelled after 12 weeks so that they retain access to a range of benefits, including cheaper prescription medicines.

The benefits of this measure also extend to partners of age pensioners, disability support pensioners and equivalent veteran payments recipients, as long as the partner is also receiving a pension. These measures will strengthen the incentives for older Australians to work and, like a series of the speakers in this debate, I hope the Senate supports the legislation quickly.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.