Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) acknowledges that reducing social harm caused by welfare-fuelled alcohol, drug and gambling abuse is a key priority nationally and for local communities;

(2) recognises that the Government is currently trialling the cashless debit card in two communities—Ceduna in South Australia, and the East Kimberley in Western Australia—in partnership with local community leaders in those communities; and

(3) acknowledges the:

(a) hard work, dedication and commitment of community leaders in Ceduna and the East Kimberley in co-designing the trials with Government, and their leadership in its implementation and delivery in their communities; and

(b) positive initial results of the cashless debit card model in the two trial communities, including the strong positive feedback from the community on the ground.

The trial thus far, as it stands in both the East Kimberley and Ceduna, is an example of the rewards of strong and resolute leadership from the federal government and from the state government in South Australia, who have become our partners in this trial, but also and particularly of local leadership, where a point was reached that enough was enough. Too many of their families and friends were dying prematurely from alcohol and drug abuse. Too many families were being destroyed by alcohol-fuelled violence. Too many children were being damaged by violence and neglect.

The cashless debit card was introduced in Ceduna on 15 March this year and in the East Kimberley region on 26 April. My direct contact is primarily with the Ceduna region, and most of my experience with the trial is in that spectrum. However, I have also viewed the data from the East Kimberley trial, and their experience seemed to be relatively uniform.

The card directs 80 per cent of a welfare recipient's income to a cashless debit card account. The other 20 per cent is allocated to a standard account. There are only three restrictions on the way a recipient can spend the 80 per cent. It cannot buy alcohol. It cannot be spent on gambling. And it cannot be converted to cash, which helps eliminate drug purchases. These three limitations are embedded electronically in the card, which is visibly identical to a standard debit card, and follow the recipient wherever it is used in Australia.

So many people no longer carry significant levels of cash. We are indeed the tap-and-go society, virtually everywhere. Anything from a chocolate bar to a coffee or a box of tissues can be bought with a simple wave of this undistinguishable card. For those very few places not participating, the recipient still has 20 per cent of their welfare income available. Honest appraisal would suggest that this is probably more than the average welfare recipient spends on luxuries.

There have been a number of critics of the trial, with groups like the Greens trying to whip up public concerns about personal freedom and choice. I say to them: these communities have made a choice. They choose to take control of their lives. They choose to help those who cannot help themselves. They choose to have safer families and choose to try to help their friends and families overcome their addictions. They choose to live longer.

In the Ceduna region, arrests under the Public Intoxication Act have fallen by more than 50 per cent. Much lower levels of alcohol are being registered at the sobering-up unit. Poker machine revenues are officially down by 15 per cent. However, the assessment area covers the district council areas of the Streaky Bay, Elliston and Lower EP councils as well, which are unaffected by the card, suggesting that the figure is probably double that in Ceduna and at least a 30 per cent drop on gambling revenues.

There has been a strong uptake in financial counselling and capability services. Fewer people are requiring homelessness services. Anecdotally, food and clothing sales are up, and the grocery supply trucks to Oak Valley have gone from one a fortnight to one a week. In fact, the biggest issue facing Oak Valley at the moment is the overcrowding in housing as a result of the far greater number of residents living back in community rather than living rough on the outskirts of Ceduna.

In Wyndham, admissions to the sobering-up unit are down 69 per cent—69 per cent—and there has been a 28 per cent fall in the call-outs for the ambulance service.

These are far better results than anticipated, which are undoubtedly improving community and household safety. The results also fully justify the actions of the local community leadership teams that have led the change. Certainly they have come under pressure, but they have stood firm in pursuit of building safer, stronger communities, and they are to be congratulated. It is very enlightening that there have been a couple of spates of cash inflows into the community. While statistics are yet come to light from the most recent bout, there is no doubt that they have resulted in a serious relapse of behaviour—drunkenness, violence and antisocial behaviour. It is also important to note in the Ceduna circumstance that Ceduna is not a predominantly Indigenous town; it is predominantly white, so this policy is affecting people right across the community and is having a very good result, it must be said.

So far, this is not any more than a trial and any decisions about other communities and wider adoption are some time off. However, if the trial improves the lives and the community of Ceduna, why would it not do the same in Port Augusta, Adelaide or in the middle of Sydney? (Time expired)

See this speech in context