Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for External Territories) Share this | Hansard source

During question time we heard from the Prime Minister, no less, that he trusted Australian people with their own money. Not if you're a blackfella, you don't. Not if you're an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person, you don't. The Prime Minister said, 'We trust them to make their own decisions'—except if you're an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person in this country. What a bizarre notion. We've had the Prime Minister stand here today and claim that he supports the rights of people to make their own decisions about how they spend their money. Yet at the very same time, walking the other side of the street, he's saying it's okay to compulsorily quarantine incomes. It's not. It's not. Prime Minister, why are you treating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people differently? The bulk of this, we know, is racially discriminatory. 'Why would the government support racially discriminatory legislation?' You might well ask, because that's what this is. Let there be no doubt.

People have mentioned the BasicsCard. Since the day of the intervention in the Northern Territory, I've been on the record opposing the intervention and opposing the BasicsCard and its imposition. Compulsorily applying income quarantining—how can you do this? I understand the argument about people needing to look after their families having their incomes properly managed. But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a universal application of quarantining, compelling people to have their incomes quarantined. That is not an opt-in process. It's unreasonable, it's unfair and it's discriminatory. This government needs to understand what it does for people. There is no evidence at all that this thing works. We know that. The University of Adelaide's research, which the government won't release, was reported on in The Guardian today and it demonstrates very clearly that this scheme is unfair and unreasonable.

The Law Council of Australia put out a press release today which I'm pleased to be able to read:

The Law Council of Australia is concerned by the restrictive nature of the Cashless Debit Card (CDC) and urges the Parliament to abandon any plan to make it an ongoing program. With the House of Representatives debating the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill today, the Law Council believes that the Bill is being pursued without the benefit of a full and independent evaluation of the CDC’s merits, or adequate community consultation of the Bill’s current proposals.

We know that whatever research has been undertaken previously, by academics and others, has demonstrated that this does not work. But the government says 'bad luck'. The Law Council refers to the Audit Office, as well as academics, having expressed grave concerns as to the methodology of these early evaluations. This is a real issue about discrimination. The Law Council says:

The CDC, especially as expanded, disproportionately applies to Indigenous peoples, and may be inconsistent with the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

It is. I ask the minister as he leaves the chamber whether he has understood what the Law Council has said about the racially discriminatory nature of this bill. Who benefits from it?

I've been involved in this game for 30-odd years, and I have never seen an approach to people in this country such as the one which has been adopted by this government. You have a responsibility, Prime Minister, to come and explain to people why Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are to be treated differently, such as in the way you are proposing to do it in this bill. It is unfair, it is unreasonable, it's unjust and it is unconscionable. Any member of this House who sits here and says they believe in and support Aboriginal self-determination and decision-making while supporting this legislation is being an absolute hypocrite. But hypocrisy knows no bounds, as we know. (Time expired)

See this speech in context