Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Seniors) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to ask the minister some questions about the work bonus scheme. Presently, somebody who is working and of pensionable age can receive $146 a fortnight before their entitlement starts to diminish. With your work bonus, you say that they can earn $250 a fortnight, which will be discounted against the income test. Is that $250 on top of the $146 or does it include the $146? In other words, are people entitled to earn $396 a fortnight before their pension is affected or is it really only an extra $114?

That is a very important question for people to understand, and it will particularly impact on the person whose situation was raised by Mr Andrews, who earned $390 working for the Electoral Commission. Yesterday in a public hearing of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters we heard evidence from representatives of the Community and Public Sector Union. I asked them if they were having a problem recruiting people who are retired to work as electoral officials because of the impact that that lump sum payment has on their pension entitlement. Under us, when we were in government, they were allowed to average it over a year, but under you it hits in a lump sum. The answer they gave was that yes, it is impacting on their ability to recruit, and the result of that, quite frankly, is the long queues that people are now experiencing on election day. We had evidence of that as well. I would like to know precisely what that $250 really means and how it will impact on people such as those who choose to work, as Mr Andrews asked.

My second question relates to the age discrimination commissioner. In your press release, you said we needed to have a dedicated age commissioner appointed. As I understand it, at the present time the Sex Discrimination Commissioner has responsibility for both. That is not what I call a dedicated person. We on this side are very supportive of the appointment of such a person. I would like some explanation as to why it has not already been done and what is in train for that appointment.

My third question is regarding Table 2.4: Budgeted expenses for outcome 4 in the portfolio budget statement for FaHCSIA. I go to the items called 'Expenses not requiring appropriation in the Budget year'—there are two such items in that outcome. In a footnote it says that this covers 'depreciation, amortisation and make good expenses'. As I understand it, depreciation is no longer paid as an up-front figure; it is paid specifically when there is a need for replacement of capital items. I would like you to confirm how much of those amounts of money are relevant to depreciation. Secondly, I want to know what a 'make good' expense is and to have a breakdown of those figures, which are quite considerable—half a million dollars and $2.4 million.

Fourthly, I note that Mr Andrews asked very specifically whether or not your department was doing any costing of possible Greens policies, as they take over in the Senate from 1 July, and he would like an answer to that question.

See this speech in context