Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Big scary numbers make great headlines. 'Welfare dependency costs Australia $160 bn each year', screamed The Daily Telegraph in September. The truth is more complex. Amongst Australia's so-called $160 billion welfare addicts, as one tabloid newspaper labelled people receiving social security, are people receiving the age pension and benefits under the NDIS. These are the people who the assistant social services minister, Zed Seselja, claims in Fairfax today are part of a 'welfare mentality' in this country. He goes on to say: 'We simply cannot go on assuming for huge numbers of Australians that welfare will just become the norm'. Well, with views like that it is little wonder the Canberra Liberals did so poorly at last weekend's election. I know Senator Seselja led the ACT Liberals for six years—a wonderful six years in opposition—until 2013, and perhaps they are still trying to recover from his failed leadership. If his comments to Fairfax are any indication, they may have some years of recovery ahead of them.

The single biggest growth item in social security is the age pension, because Australians are living longer and healthier lives, and because the baby boomers are now in the age pension phase of their lives. Are these the people that Senator Seselja believes are 'welfare addicts' or suffer from a 'welfare mentality'? What a disgraceful characterisation. Blind Freddy can see what this government is up to. Senator Seselja and his senior minister, the member for Pearce, are on a mission to demonise and divide—to demonise people receiving social security benefits, set their fellow Australians on them, and then make the cuts. The ministers are preparing the groundwork for more harsh cuts, just like they did in the 2014 budget: a one-month wait for Newstart for young job seekers, even though it is estimated that there is just one job available for every five; raising the eligibility age for Newstart, pushing people who are aged 22 and 24 years old onto the Youth Allowance—that is, a cut of $48 a week that makes it harder to live, let alone meet the costs of seeking work; the abolition of the Pensioner Education Supplement; and cutting Paid Parental Leave to 80,000 new mums each year.

The ministers, and their young advisers on $100,000 salaries—and higher—may be doing high fives and backslaps. After all, the nation is 'addicted to welfare,' and addictions must be broken. But let us step back and look at the facts. Let us separate the truth from the untruths. Australia spends much less on social security, as a proportion of national income, than the OECD average. We spent 8.4 per cent of our average GDP, when the average is 12.3 per cent, and we spend less than both the US and the UK. By the tabloid headlines and the squawking of those opposite about the high cost, not many would know that. People might be forgiven for thinking nearly all our GDP is swallowed up in a vast mountain of social security payments. But it is 8.4 per cent—two thirds of what the OECD spends, and less than the US and the UK. What is more, more than 40 per cent of Australia's social security spending goes to households in the lowest 20 per cent of incomes. That is exceptional targeting: people who need the most support get it. This is the best targeting of any nation in the OECD.

In my electorate of Lyons, in March this year there were 4,973 people receiving Newstart, 726 young people receiving Youth Allowance, 6,887 on a Disability Support Pension, and 15,632 on an age pension. Labor supports a properly targeted social security system to ensure payments go to those who need it most. We support investment in education and social services that ensure people get a fair crack at life and that seek to address intergenerational inequity. Labor does not support—and will never support—the demonisation of Australians who require assistance, and we reject attempts by this government to turn Australians on each other.

See this speech in context