Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

HILL () (): If ever there was a clue that the government is doing the right thing, it is when we are in the middle of the opposition's hysteria and the Greens' sanctimonious nonsense. The Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management Reform) Bill 2023 should not be controversial. It really shouldn't. It simply delivers the government's election commitment to reform income management. It gives the choice to nearly 25,000 people who are currently on income management to access superior technology. Most of those people are on the BasicsCard in the Northern Territory, and so it implements new technology while we honour our election promise to consult with communities on income management.

The provisions in this bill merit exactly what exists in the current legislation while that consultation continues. It responds to recommendations from the senate legislation committee that the BasicsCard is out of date. That's because the Liberals and the Nationals failed to invest in it. They were so focused on pumping $70 million of taxpayer money to a private company for their precious cashless debit card that they failed to invest in the BasicsCard and left Indigenous communities languishing with substandard technology. For people on the BasicsCard, it's still only accepted by pre-approved merchants. People are still restricted on where they can shop and what they can buy. So this bill will implement better technology, a modern financial experience, a contemporary debit card with an associated bank account and really radical stuff like 'tap to pay' and having a PIN! It should not be controversial. It will stop the stigma and shame for so many thousands of Australians. But it is in the context of and also progresses and honours our election commitment to scrapping the cashless debit card, and we have done that. It's a principled position.

With the second reading amendment—I've read it—I'll give them points: at least they're now being honest. They want to bring back the cashless debit card. That's what it says. They put out a media release today telling Australians that their policy is to bring back the cashless debit card and forced income management. Let's be very clear: this is not just about vulnerable communities. It's not about the semiracist stereotypes that you want to conjure of Indigenous people. As the previous Senate report said, this is a racist scheme. The former government's scheme, the Liberal Party's scheme, was a racist scheme.

Last term, I called out the Liberals' and Nationals' secret plans to expand the cashless debit card nationwide to force all social security recipients, including pensioners, onto the card. It was met with hysteria and denials. The former prime minister said in the election campaign, 'This is an outrageous scare campaign.' Well, it turns out I was right. I'm going to quote from Niki Savva's book Bulldozed. From a prominent backbencher: 'We had no agenda for a fourth term. We didn't tell people what we'd do with it. In fact, there were three policies agreed to by Morrison's Expenditure Review Committee ahead of budget. The first was to expand the cashless debit card.' That's right: their No. 1 secret priority was to expand the cashless debit card. Also on page 271, it says, 'The other options ticked off by the ERC were an expansion of the cashless debit card.' They had no agenda for a fourth term; that's right—and they didn't get one. But they did have a secret plan to expand the cashless debit card. It was ticked off before the election, and they didn't tell Australians. But at least they're now being honest; I'll give them that. They want to expand the cashless debit card.

Australians should be very clear: this is not about these four communities; this is about their nationwide expansion plan as the former government alluded to. They dropped all the hints. There was a breadcrumb trail of all of their statements. When you lined them up, it was clear as day. I've never had an answer to the question: why would you introduce legislation to allow yourself to force all age pensioners onto the card if that's not what you wanted to do? There is still no good answer.

The former social services minister, Anne Ruston, said that they were looking for it to be the universal platform. You might be pleased to know that the bill before the House also removes once and for all the ability of the Commonwealth to make a mandatory age pensioner referral. I can accept that people can have a different view on this, but the terms in which the debate is being conducted are disgusting and, frankly, offensive. Look at some of the language. Here are some direct quotes from the parliamentary debates. This is what those opposite say.

What the Labor Party has done is unleash a tsunami of alcohol and drugs into vulnerable communities … It will be an increase in violence and antisocial behaviour. More domestic violence and more neglected children will be the outcome of what the Labor Party did today …

We know that the people who will suffer the most from that tsunami of additional alcohol and drugs will be defenceless children who will be neglected and—predominantly—women who will suffer domestic violence.

There will be a tsunami. This is a good quote. Apparently an authoritative source now is a report in the Australian. Who knew? You no longer call it the 'Government Gazette'; it's the 'Opposition Gazette' now!

Yet what we see is Labor ideology at work. … I refer you to some pieces by Ellen Whinnett in the Australian. The headlines are: 'Cashless debit card cut, "now it's bedlam" in Ceduna' and 'How the cashless debit card's axing left chaos in remote WA'. That's chaos and bedlam.

It's bedlam: kids not being fed, women getting bashed up, 'street brawls and a large number of intoxicated individuals arguing and fighting'—all because of the Labor Party.

The terms of the debate are over the top. We've had report after report from the former Senate committees looking at this that concluded unequivocally that, for all the good that income management can do for some people, overall it did overwhelmingly more harm than good. We can all sit here and listen to these anecdotes. I remember last term we were called paedophiles at one point. So we can all have the insinuations that somehow we're relishing seeing women being bashed and children being molested. That's their tactic: smear us in that way. They can use the little semiracist stereotypes that somehow this is about four isolated communities and there's nothing to see here, but we know the truth.

Their plan is forced income management right across the country. That's their ideology. It's what their prominent backbenchers say. It's what the former prime minister alluded to. It's what the former social services minister was committed to. It's what we now know from Niki Savva's book was the plan of the ERC. It was ticked off. It wasn't just a policy at the election; they'd costed it, they'd done it and it was ticked off.

See this speech in context