Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Throsby proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government hurting Australians by cutting community services.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Abbott government's budget cuts have had a particularly harsh impact on community services across Australia. Vulnerable people including those trying to get treatment to free themselves of the ice addiction and women and children fleeing domestic violence are the ones who are going to suffer as a result. The government has made plenty of promises about combatting ice addiction but it has been wanting when it comes to action.

It takes a special kind of incompetence to spend $20 million three days before budget night telling the people of Australia that we have got a problem and then three days later ripping $800 million from the solutions to that problem. This is exactly what this government have done. They spent $20 million on an advertising campaign telling Australians that we had a problem with ice addiction and then, not three days later, the Treasurer stood at that dispatch box and ripped $800 million from the funds which provide the solution to ice addiction and other drug and alcohol addiction in this country.

A few moments ago, the Minister for Health, in answer to a question that I put to her about the cuts to services which are providing relief to people with drug and alcohol addictions, denied there had been any cuts to those services at all. She stood at that dispatch box and lectured me for having the temerity to ask her a question about the cuts that they are imposing upon alcohol and drug services throughout the country, particularly those in the electorate of Canning—and in Western Australia we have one of the highest levels of amphetamine addiction in the country. She said that we were misleading the parliament. She said that it was not true. In the time that she made that denial and misled the parliament, I had made available to me and the House a copy of the transcript from the Community Affairs Legislation Committee of 1 June 2015, where Dr Bartlett, of the minister's department, was asked directly about cuts to the Substance Misuse Prevention and Service Improvement Grants. In answer to a question from Senator Di Natale, Dr Bartlett had this to say: 'We have cut $7 million.' So, when the minister comes back into the House, we will be expecting that she apologises to the House, to the people of Western Australia and to the people of Canning for lying to the House, for misleading the House about the cuts that they have made to substance misuse programs, including those programs which are providing relief to people who are addicted to the terrible drug ice or methamphetamine in Western Australia.

In the last two budgets, the government has quietly ripped a total of almost $800 million from the health flexible funds, which include substance misuse funds supporting illicit drug treatment and rehabilitation as well as prevention strategies. We still do not know—and the minister had the opportunity to clarify this during question time today but she refused to—exactly how much money is going to be ripped from those funds, which are providing money to drug and alcohol rehabilitation services throughout the country. It could be from all of them; it could be from any of them.

If you contrast the position that has been taken by Bill Shorten's Labor opposition to providing security and certainty and funding to those critical services with the position taken by the government, the contrast could not be greater. Only Labor understands the importance of supporting workers and the services that they provide in front-line treatment. That is why last week, in the electorate of Canning, Bill Shorten announced that a Labor government would provide $2.7 million in funding for drug treatment services to the Palmerston Association Inc. and Hope Community Services in Canning. This would guarantee funding to those services through to 2019. In addition to that, the Leader of the Opposition promised that we would also support women and children escaping domestic violence to get the legal support that they need, by investing $270,000 for the Peel Community Legal Services. The government had an opportunity to match that promise. The government was given a specific opportunity to match that promise. Indeed, the Labor spokesperson stood up and asked the Labor candidate for the seat of Canning, 'Will you match Labor's commitment to provide $2.7 million worth of funding certainty to the drug and alcohol treatment services in the electorate that you want the people to vote for you in?' He refused to give that guarantee. When asked what he was going to do, do you know what he promised? He promised a talkfest. We have got a National Ice Taskforce. It seems to be that their answer to everything is a task force. When asked to match the funding, all the person who wants to be the next member for Canning could guarantee was that he would convene a workshop and there would be a Canning-specific ice task force. There you have it. The contrast could not be starker. We had on the one hand the Labor candidate promising to secure funding of over $2.7 million to those much-needed services, and we had the Liberal candidate squibbing the issue, offering nothing more than a talkfest.

As I said at the opening, the government have promised a lot but delivered very little. They ran a $20 million television advertising campaign telling the people of Australia something that they already knew, and that is that there is a problem with ice in our communities. But then, three days later, they ripped the money out of the services that were providing an answer to that problem. Their priorities are all wrong. They had the opportunity, and indeed the minister had the opportunity, to provide some certainty for the services right around the country in terms of their funding, but she could not do that. Instead of guaranteeing funding for the full three years over the forward estimates, all that she could do was confirm that there would be one year's guaranteed funding and no more. You would think that, if we have got a problem of the magnitude that the government tell us we have got when it comes to amphetamines and methamphetamines and ice addiction in this country, they would be guaranteeing more than one year's funding to the services that are providing an answer to that problem. But that is all the minister could do.

Well, it is not just those services, because we know that we have a significant problem with residential rehab services and detoxification services and waiting lists right around the country. A few months ago, we saw the member for Dobell give a speech in her electorate where she made the outrageous claim that she knew firsthand of a situation where somebody had walked into a public hospital after gouging their eyeballs out and eating them with a spoon, in an ice-induced rage. We know of course that the story was not true, but the member for Dobell, in her defence, said that this was evidence of the concern that both she and members of her constituency had about the scourge of ice on the New South Wales Central Coast. We contacted the Kamira Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Services in Wyong on the New South Wales Central Coast, and we heard of the problems that they are facing. They have waiting lists in excess of three months. This is a service which provides specialist treatment for women in particular. If these people do not get treatment inside a one-month period, they face having their children removed from them. They have over 30 people calling this service every day seeking access to a residential rehab service, and they have to turn them away.

I hope the member for Dobell is raising this issue with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Health, who could do nothing more than deny the truth that they are cutting funds from these services. I hope each and every one of those members opposite who have been running those forums in their electorates, whipping their constituencies up about the concern they have with ice and the fact that they have a national task force will ask themselves what they are going to do about the solutions to the problem. We know that they are cutting $7.2 million from the funds. We know that in Dobell, in Alice Springs, in the Northern Territory and in Canning and in services right around the country they do not have the resources today. The problem is getting worse and all this government can do is cut funds from the services which are the answer to the problem. Their priorities are all wrong: $20 million to tell Australia we have a problem; $800 million from the solution to the problem. The people of Canning and the people of Australia deserve much better.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A few days ago a young three-year-old boy, Aylan Kurdi, became the face of a refugee crisis in the Middle East. That one image has been used to mobilise resources around the world towards supporting the refugee crisis unfolding there and this government has stepped up to help ameliorate that crisis. This morning on the front page of The Daily Telegraph perhaps we were shown the face of a boy who will become the face of the ice crisis in Australia, Brayden Rhodes—tragically, a seven-year-old boy who was killed by his uncle yesterday in Sydney who was believed to be on ice. Certainly, The Daily Telegraph's front page suggests that this boy is now the face of the ice crisis and perhaps will ensure that the broader community is made more aware of this dreadful crisis and what is being done, what more will be done and how we all need to work together as community to try to address it.

There are tragic situations like what happened to Brayden Rhodes occurring all the time now. Sadly, the number of users of this insidious drug ice has doubled in the last two years. Those using ice are doing it more frequently, with the number of people using it at least monthly also doubling in the last few years. It is one of the most addictive and dangerous drugs that we have seen come to the Australian marketplace. Unfortunately, it is widespread. I am informed it is readily available and in many cases, as we saw in the newspapers this morning, it is deadly.

We know that today ice causes more deaths on our roads than alcohol, at least in Victoria and no doubt in other states. We also know that nearly 60 per cent of all organised crime figures are involved in its production. So we must do everything that we can to get on top of this insidious drug, and this government is taking the lead to do that. Yes, we have set up a National Ice Taskforce and we asked a very prominent member of our community, former Victorian Chief Police Commissioner Lay, to head up that task force, a very highly regarded individual. He has already begun his work and soon we will be getting his final report. But many steps have already been taken, and I will come to that but, before doing that, let me first address the allegations made by the member for Throsby.

To this point, the ice scourge has been dealt with in a quite bipartisan way in this parliament. We have tried to work cooperatively with the opposition. I think the work that has occurred across the parliament in committees between individuals has been outstanding. We all need to work together on this problem. Indeed, we are working cooperatively with state governments, be they coalition or Labor state governments.

I am disappointed that the member for Throsby has tried to politicise this issue today. He is politicising it because of the Canning by-election that is coming up and he is politicising it on the basis of a falsehood. The falsehood he was alluding to today is that we have cut funding to drug and alcohol services. In fact, as the Minister for Health outlined in question time today directly to the question put to her by the member for Throsby, no such cuts to drug and alcohol services have been made. I would have thought that the member for Throsby would have had the decency in this matter of public importance debate to change some of his rhetoric. He got the answer from the Minister for Health that no cuts had been made, but he has continued with his false rhetoric and tried to split the bipartisan approach to this national scourge. I think it is outrageous. I used to think the member for Throsby was better than that, one of the more impressive members of the team opposite. But I am very disappointed with him.

Let me outline to the members opposite and to this parliament some of the actions that this government is taking in relation to ice, and perhaps some of my own reflections on what more could be done as a community. The first thing that we should point out is the action being taken jointly by the state and federal governments to try to crack down on the supply and production of ice. At the end of the day, if there is no supply there is no ice problem. You can only have addictions and problems if there is a supply. So we have put an additional $18 million towards the Australian Crime Commission to help crack down on the ice networks, as organised crime particularly seem to be the distributors and manufacturers of this dreadful drug. That is the first thing, and that is on top of a number of other activities which are occurring in law enforcement agencies at the state level, in particular through the National Anti-Gangs Squad, which is now operating in four states—Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia.

The second thing we are seeing occurring now across Australia is additional support and hotlines for parents who, from the feedback I have received, are so desperately in need of advice on how to deal with this, particularly if they have a child who may be using the drug. I must admit I commend the Andrews government in Victoria for introducing the Ice Help Line, which parents can call to get confidential advice on how to deal with a particular matter.

We have put more money into drug and alcohol services. This year alone something like $218 million for drug and alcohol treatment is going towards detox and rehabilitation services and the like. Is more going to be needed if this ice epidemic continues? Undoubtedly. Of course, state governments have primary responsibility in that area, but I believe that more detox and rehabilitation services may be required in the future if this deadly drug continues and the scourge continues at the rate it is. In relation to our rehabilitation services, I think we should be looking at some of the overseas models in terms of how they have done it. In particular, there are lessons to be learnt from Sweden and we should be examining that to also inform some of our policy.

Finally—and again we have started this initiative—we need to change the culture in our community in relation to illicit drugs and in particular in relation to ice. We need to get the message out there to young people, and indeed across the community, that ice is a deadly drug and that illicit drugs, illegal drugs, should never be taken, ever, and that it is not safe to take illegal drugs. That message needs to be made clear. In some respects, I find it odd that in our community we tell people very bluntly and very graphically that every cigarette kills. And that is true: every cigarette will cause you damage and ultimately smoking will kill. I think we need to have the same level of graphic message in relation to illicit drugs—that every drug is dangerous and that in some cases taking a drug only once or twice, particularly ice, can make you addicted.

When you look at the statistics as to why individuals take up drugs in the first instance, it is quite informative. You will often hear that people take up drugs in the first instance because of depression, because they are feeling down or because they want a pick-me-up. When you look at the data, the National Drug Strategy Household Survey shows that only seven per cent of people said they took drugs in the first instance because they thought it would improve their mood or would stop them feeling unhappy. Over half of the respondents, 51.4 per cent of people, said they took drugs for the first time because friends or family encouraged them to do so—that is, it was culturally accepted to take drugs in the first instance. To me, that suggests that we can work on this and that we can continue with these graphic ads on TV and continue with this very strong message that drugs should never be taken, particularly ice.

I think we have a very good national task force in place. We have already begun the efforts, but more effort is absolutely going to be required. This government is leading from the front, in cooperation with state governments, but, sadly, no longer with the support of the Labor Party. (Time expired)

David Feeney (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Justice) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This week Australia marked a significant anniversary. This of course was the week where the Abbott government turned two. It has, indeed, been a very harrowing two years for the Australian people. Alas, '2' seems to be the appropriate number for this government to have achieved because they behave like two-year-olds. Australia still waits for the adults we were promised.

In 2014, the Abbott government gave us the budget it wanted to give to this country—a budget of cuts and a budget that imagined a little Australia. We all know how that story turned out. So, in 2015, it then tried to give us the budget it thought Australia wanted. But, again, there is a theme running between these two budgets. The first is that this is a government that actually has no sense of its own purpose. It has come to government without a sense of what its task is. In 2014, the government told the people of Australia that it was here to deal with a budget emergency. By 2015 the budget emergency had vanished and instead we had a government that was in the business of doubling the deficit.

In 2015, however, we saw another theme emerge, notwithstanding the confusion of the other side, and that is that there were a number of malevolent cuts in the 2014 budget that endured and survived into 2015. Again and again, we have seen very important causes and very important undertakings, front-line services to the Australian people, cut by this government. Alas, when considering ice and the scourge of ice, this is not an exception.

In last year's budget, we saw some $197 million cut from the Health flexible funds. That immediately meant $7 million being axed from the Substance Misuse Prevention and Service Improvement Grants Fund—a very real and tangible slashing of service. What we have also seen in this year's budget is an additional $596 million taken from those flexible funds. So, again and again, we have seen critical services in health prevention cut and slashed by this government.

There is one area where the government seem keen to demonstrate their bona fides and that is in the pretence of action—the appearance of action in the absence of real action. That means television commercials and that means a government stepping up to the by-election in Canning and desperately searching for something to talk about, because we know the government cannot talk to the people of Canning about the economy. The Treasurer lost the power and the capacity to do that a very long time ago. Their message of low growth and no jobs is clearly not resonating in the community. So the economy was off the list. That left them, in their view, with a law and order campaign around ice. So we have a television campaign and we have a government fumbling through the Canning by-election advertising the pretence of action

In its by-election blues, in its pretence of action, it has talked about forming a National Ice Taskforce, because those opposite understand something very well indeed, and that is that committees are the practical alternative to work. So we have a task force, and we have a television campaign. What we do not have is a government stepping up to the challenge of building evidence-based policies that take this challenge on in a real and meaningful way.

We heard from the previous speaker, the member for Aston, about the real bona fides of the government in this debate, because when the rubber hits the road he said, 'Of course, this is an area that is principally a state responsibility, and states have the primary responsibility'—not the primary responsibility for television commercials and not the primary responsibility for announcing task forces but the primary responsibility for building evidence-based policies and funding them.

So this is a government fighting a mirage. It is in the Canning by-election searching for a reason to exist. It cannot talk about the economy and it cannot talk about meaningful action in terms of the ice epidemic, but it can talk about the appearance of action. Again and again, the theme that unites the chaos of 2014 and the anarchy of the government's present position is cuts, but there is also another theme, and that is an adherence to clinging to Labor ideas. Among the tiny number of achievements this government does seek to point to, it points to the collaboration between state and federal police forces and the MOUs and resources that have made those police forces' work more effective—a fine Labor initiative. Of course it enjoys bipartisan support. It was our idea.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a day when a former Labor president comes out and publicly lashes the Labor Party about their opposition to free trade, on a day when they try to politicise the strong and generous response to the Syrian refugee crisis, Labor have again picked up the scattergun with this MPI, politicising the issue of ice addiction and community services in order to gain political advantage for the by-election of Canning. Labor want to talk about community service credentials, which they define exclusively by the amount of money they spend and the amount of legislation they put through the parliament. Call me hard-headed, but when someone tries to convince me of their credentials I have a bit of a look at their track record. So let's look at some examples. It turns out that Labor, when in government, handed out $72,000 in a grant to the Auburn Community Development Network. I thought that sounded like an interesting network. It sounds like a nice thing to do. But it turns out that this was handed over in order to host—get this—an 'enviro tea salon'. Thanks to the funding, participants could take part in: 'a weaving workshop using native lomandra grass. Participants will be encouraged to share their energy efficiency tips in exchange for a free seedling, re-potted into a recycled coffee cup sourced from a local business.' There's community services! There's high-impact community services for you!

Of course, we see many more of these. There was their numeracy natural partnership, which produced no improvement in student outcomes despite $540 million in payments. If you measure it by spending, it was terrific. If you measure it by outcomes, it was completely lacklustre. The Department of Parliamentary Services spent about $2.4 million on staff-related training, including—get this—getting a good night's sleep. We might define that as an important community service, but I think there are better ways to spend the money. And the list goes on. In fact, many of their community services, it turns out, were unfunded beyond their time in government. In fact, we heard about that just a few minutes ago with their community legal services.

So, unapologetically, we had to clean some of this stuff out and to focus our efforts on community services that delivered outcomes and were genuinely innovative. An outcome focus is exactly what we have been doing since we got into government. If you look at our employment services providers, jobactive, they are focused on delivering outcomes. In fact, we are doing something very innovative, which is actually paying employment service providers for delivering outcomes. Our Transition to Work Program, which is designed—get this; it is revolutionary— to get young people into jobs, is looking at a series of innovative pilots that actually have a track record in delivering genuine youth employment.

And, of course, we are working hard on innovative, outcome-focused programs for treating ice, like hotlines for parents, which we heard about earlier, and over $200 million for drug and alcohol services and education campaigns. To hear those opposite say that those advertisements were a waste of money is a slap in the face to every family member of an ice addict, because they know how important awareness and education are to solving this problem.

This government's strong track record for community services is illustrated no better than in my electorate of Hume, where we have a new mental health headspace opening in Goulburn in 2016. Here the community cried out loudly for that community service, and they will be getting it. There is $500,000 for a childcare centre at Boorowa, a community of just over 1,000 people struggling to get residents back into the workforce, particularly female residents. And the list goes on. We spend $227 million each year—or we will—in social services. That money should be spent well. We will always spend it well.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was wondering, as I was sitting here during question time, what parallel universe we actually live in here, especially when the foreign minister, the member for Curtin, got up and berated us after she had received a piece of paper from the Attorney-General's office telling us how much they had spent on legal services across the country. But, of course, what she said belies the truth. Can I just enlighten the chamber—and you particularly, Mr Deputy Speaker—on some comments made today by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory about 'people in custody who are waiting' and 'witnesses whose memories are fading' because a legal aid agency does not have enough money for lawyers.

The North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency, or NAAJA, has proposed to vacate seven trials in which it was to defend people in the Northern Territory Supreme Court today because it did not have enough federal funding to handle its caseload. NAAJA principal lawyer Jonathon Hunyor told the court:

Our resources aren't keeping up with the demands … we don't have staff to meet our commitments.

Mr Hunyor said NAAJA no longer had access to the Expensive Indigenous Case Fund, which allowed it to outsource help for cases that would cost more than $20,000. Very serious alleged crimes such as murder and sexual assault are the most expensive. Chief Justice Trevor Riley said:

I'm concerned about underlying insufficient funding for lawyers on the ground.

This is not us speaking, foreign minister. This is not us speaking, justice minister and Attorney-General. It is the Chief Justice of the Northern Territory Supreme Court. Following the 2015-16 budget, where the federal government funding was found to be insufficient to keep up with the exploding case load, Chief Justice Riley described the funding situation as 'a blow to the heart of the Northern Territory justice system'. Call me naive, but you would reckon he might know. You would think the foreign minister might actually think before she opens her big fat trap and says stupid things in this parliament.

Mr Tudge interjecting—

You are taking offence? These are the people who call us racists. They take offence at me saying someone has got a big fat trap.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Lingiari will take his seat, please. The member for Aston on a point of order.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the member for Lingiari to withdraw that offensive comment he made. It is an unparliamentary comment.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. Nevertheless, it remains the fact that this afternoon we saw an object lesson in why we cannot believe this government and why the people—

Mr Tudge interjecting—

This is the same bloke who was defending $500 million worth of cuts from last year's budget for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This is the same bloke who is defending the cuts of $160 million from Aboriginal health programs. This person seeks to represent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander interests as a parliamentary secretary. He wouldn't know his backside from his elbow.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Member for Lingiari, please resume your seat. The member for Corangamite on a point of order.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I would ask the member opposite to refer to members by their correct title.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. Member for Lingiari, please resume.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Aston is a delightful individual! Sadly, he knows very little about this subject, which he is supposed to be representing the government on, and he does not defend the interests of those people whose interests he says he is looking after in the executive of this government. He does not look after their interests. I have just spoken about one community legal service. In its two years in power, the Abbott government has taken an axe to vital legal assistance services across this country. It has been evidenced today by the comments in the Northern Territory Supreme Court. The government has cut from every type of service. It has cut from legal aid, from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services, from family violence prevention legal services and from community legal centres. And these cuts are continuing.

In the 2014 budget, the government took another $15 million from legal aid and another $6 million from community legal services. Earlier this year, the government tried to back away from some of their cuts to the CLCs. They cannot be believed. When the member for Curtin got up here this afternoon and so glibly spoke about what the government says it has been doing, she was actually telling us a giant fib—because we know and it is the experience on the ground that the savage cuts they have made are hurting people across this country. (Time expired)

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I talk on an MPI, I am always very curious to have a look at it and try to understand why the Labor Party might be putting it forward. When I looked at this MPI and saw that the member for Throsby was putting it forward, I thought, 'This seems to lack substance. It seems to be all about style.' Member for Throsby, I do not do this very often but I will give you a tiny bit of advice. I think you need a little less of that professional coaching that you have had. You walk to the dispatch box and stand there, You put one hand here and the other hand goes into your pocket. You look around and think to yourself, 'Okay, I'll get a bit of hand movement going here with this hand here.' We are all watching; we see it every single time. You walk to the dispatch box, you put one hand here and you put the other hand in your pocket and you make yourself look very important.

Member for Throsby, let's have a little less concentration on the style and a bit more concentration on the substance. If you focused on the substance, you would know we have not cut drug and alcohol funding. Go away and do some research. Forget about your little style tips; do the research and focus on the substance. There have been no cuts to drug and alcohol funding whatsoever. As a matter of fact, what has been taking place in this space is bipartisan cooperation. There was bipartisan cooperation until you started this shameful debate which seeks to break this bipartisanship on this subject. We in this place should all be above that. This is not about political opportunism. This is about a scourge which is impacting on communities right across Australia. Rather than running dirty little smear campaigns such as we see with this MPI, you should all be seeking to work with the government to make sure that we can combat this scourge

Let us look at what the government has done. We are running a TV campaign and everyone who has seen those ads knows that they are working and that they are having a real impact on the community. If you see those ads, you cannot help but be confronted by the images in them. They portray what is happening out there in communities, in hospitals and in emergency waiting rooms. They portray the kinds of actions that are occurring when these people are inflicted by this insidious drug. We have also set up a hotline for parents, which enables parents who are dealing with these types of issues for the first time and encountering stuff that no parent would ever, ever want to face to seek advice. We are establishing a national ice task force with the states. We are working with the state governments cooperatively. We are putting substance into the methods to deal with this crisis which is gripping our community, and all we get from the other side is a pathetic MPI like this.

We on this side are about substance, as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker. We are about addressing issues properly. We are about putting policies in place. We are not about style and seeking to look good; we are about effective action. (Time expired)

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I relish the opportunity to speak on this matter of public importance in this very important place. The matter of public importance today raises the real question that I have been asking myself across the last two days, and that is: What does this government have against anything with 'community' in its title? Everything that relates to community seems to have been slashed.

The member for Batman rightly pointed out in his contribution that what we are dealing with today in talking about the cuts to community services across different sectors are the remnants of the cruel 2014 budget that those opposite realised, probably too late, was not translating with the Australian people. The Australian people had cottoned on, and some of that was because groups like community legal centres ran a campaign when they saw the savage cuts to their programs, when they saw the dollar figures in that first budget. So they got busy and they ran a community campaign.

If you want a lesson in a community awareness campaign, you might want to talk to the community legal centres, because they ran such a good campaign that those opposite decided, 'Oops; we had better put some of this money back.' But they put the money back after community legal centres had already lost staff. I had a roundtable in the electorate of Lalor with the community organisations that work so hard on the ground in my community—organisations that work with refugee resettlement programs, our community legal centre and people who work with the most vulnerable on their worst days to provide them with relief and provide them with financial counselling. At that roundtable, in an hour and a half, each of those organisations relayed to me how dramatic the cuts were and the impact they were going to have on the services they could provide to the most vulnerable in my community. It was an eye-opener.

I had been through the 2014 budget with a fine toothcomb and then we had some announcements that said that money was going back. But when I sat with those community organisations they were not grateful or happy, because the funding that was put back was not put back for a long enough period of time to ensure that they could continue those services. They highlighted for me something that most of us who have been in any kind of management position will understand, and that is that retaining experienced staff is one of the toughest things to do in any business and any organisation, They highlighted for me very, very clearly that staff retention was their primary concern and that this government's 'chop, put back, chop, put back' had impacted directly on their ability to retain their experienced staff. It is still impacting now, and it will impact again.

There is not a business in the world that works in six-month cycles. Nobody puts their hand up to say, 'I'll take that temporary job for six months,' when there is a job around the corner with a three-year contract. We can talk about dollars but what we should talk about are the impacts. Community organisations in my electorate do not have the staff on the ground that they had two years ago when this government came to power. They do not have the same level of resourcing and they do not have the staff. It is an absolute disgrace. That leads me to ask again: What does this government have against communities? Communities have been hit and hit and hit.

What we are hearing today is absolute denial. I was a school teacher for a long time, and I understand the principle of, 'If you are caught, deny, deny, deny.' I am very practised in unpacking the deny, deny, deny principle. (Time expired)

Andrew Broad (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to talk about community and community services. Community is a matter of public importance. If there is one thing that I know and understand about the electorate that I represent it is that we are made up of communities. It always amuses me that, in a lot of ways, the Greens represent the richest electorate in Australia. Then probably comes the Liberal Party, representing some of richer ones—some of the country Libs not so—and then comes the Labor Party. But, as the National Party and country MPs would know, we represent some of the poorest in our society. So we have a very strong interest on this side in delivering community services but we also understand that the people who live in our communities want a hand up, not a hand out.

If I think about the communities I represent, we have great organisations such as Sunassist where people voluntarily drive cars and pick up people who are unable to get the groceries, go to the doctor and to health appointments. We have great organisations like the Christian Emergency Food Centre. I was in there the other day and the federal government gave this organisation $50,000. Just think about this for a moment—you want to talk about communities; you want to listen for a moment. We have listened to you for a while, but listen to this: $50,000 is all they get. They have 70 volunteers and they get food—sometimes schools donate food, package it and send it in. They have people come in—people who might be victims of domestic violence, people who might be drought affected farmers. There was a lady out the back who was packing food parcels. She was 89 years old—now that is about community.

The people in my community are saying: 'We want the opportunity to grow the net worth of our town. We want jobs for younger Australians. We want a free trade agreement, frankly, so we can open the markets up.' Those things create wealth in the poorest communities in Australia and, when you have got wealth in those communities, you empower them to have the time and the dollars to commit to building their communities.

Communities are built from the grassroots up; they are not built from the federal government throwing money at them. That is what our side of parliament understands. If we can create the framework for those communities to prosper, they will prosper. They will do it for themselves, as opposed to the other side of the parliament who simply wanted to shut down those rural communities. You talk about six months forward estimates: try running a cattle business and then shutting the whole trade in 24 hours.

You have got to build the framework. That is exactly what we have been doing: we have been building the telecommunications framework; we have been building the road framework; and we have been creating trade opportunities. This is all about building up communities.

If I think about the dollars that we have committed—federal dollars that have gone into my community—it has been substantial. So not only have we created the framework but we have also ensured that we have picked up from the bottom. There is a very high Indigenous population in the electorate of Mallee. I can put my finger on direct funding of over $20 million. I can put my finger on—and this is a lesson on community—an oncology wing. Here we had a community that had the worst five-year survival rates for cancer. They are in the process of raising a million dollars of their own. The federal government has then come along and given them another million dollars. The only million dollars that is still to come to the table is from the Victorian Labor Party. They have not committed it.

If you want to talk about communities and look at how you can lift standards of living, I would encourage—and I see a Labor Party member from Victoria there—you to talk to your state colleagues and say: 'The community has raised a million dollars. The federal government has raised a million dollars.' It is time that you talked to your Labor counterparts in Victoria to chip in their one-third.

We are building communities. Not only are we building communities; we are building opportunities and growing economies. We all know that, if we have a strong and robust economy, it becomes the engine room so we have jobs and wealth. And, out of those jobs and wealth, we create an energy in those communities that brings prosperity. That is what we are doing. That is what our side of parliament fully understands and that is what we are going to deliver to the Australian people.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to follow the contribution by the member for Mallee. It actually gave me some understanding of the approach the Abbott government is taking to community services. The approach is: let them do it by themselves—no role for the federal government whatsoever. Stand there like Pontius Pilate, wash your hands and say, 'Hey, you can do it by yourselves. If you can't do it by yourselves, or if you need some assistance from the federal government, that means that you are not worthy of any support.'

It really has given me some understanding that I was lacking beforehand, because I was wondering: why is it that the Abbott government has cut all the funding to community services? Why is it that the Abbott government is not funding community health programs and programs that help people who are addicted to ice? Why is it that the Abbott government walks away from supporting families? Why is that the Abbott government walks away from supporting anyone who looks to government for support? It is because those on the other side of this parliament believe: they can do it themselves.

It is not about the community; it is about the economy. We are here in this parliament for one reason and one reason only: to be slaves to the economy. We are not here to support the community. We are not here to ensure that those grassroots community organisations have the funds that they need to provide services to people who desperately look for help. No, no, no. Government is not about that; government is about the economy.

I actually thought the economy was there to support the community but, unfortunately, those on the other side of this parliament do not get it. They are slaves to the mantra of doing everything for the economy rather than to the people who put them here and the community that they represent here in this parliament. I am absolutely disgusted listening to the contributions made by those on the other side of this parliament It shows that they have got absolutely no idea what community services are. They have got absolutely no idea what their communities look for from their government. They are so out of touch and arrogant and they really do not want to support the people that they are here to represent.

But now we come to talk about ice, the ice task force and addressing the issue of ice. Ice is a dreadful drug. It has caused so much harm and so much hurt throughout the community. But this government's response is to create task forces, to advertise in newspapers, and to hold forums throughout Australia to hear and tell horrific stories and not even check whether those stories are correct. At one of those forums—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Yes, I know. The member for Charlton reminded me it was the member for Dobell who told of a horrific story of a person gouging their eye out at John Hunter Hospital in the electorate of the member for Charlton. But then, when the veracity of this statement was checked, I think you will be absolutely devastated to hear that there were no medical records of this occurrence. I just do not understand. The best way to address ice addiction is not just to hold community forums, not to place advertisements in the local papers, not to promote the members opposite but rather to ensure that those services are funded on the ground—services that people need to actually fight their ice addiction. I think this government stands condemned because it is all about promotion, noise, fluff and bubbles rather than action and addressing the real issue. (Time expired)

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not quite sure where to start after that contribution from the member for Shortland. I do not think we understood much of anything she was saying other than what we know about those opposite is that they will often say whatever they can no matter what the truth of the matter is. We have just seen a fine example of that from the member for Shortland.

But I want to start off my contribution by addressing a comment made by the member for Lingiari in this debate. This is an important debate about community services, but I have to say that what the member for Lingiari did in the comment that he made about the foreign minister was an absolute disgrace. He said to 'shut her big, fat trap'. That is the most disgusting, misogynistic, sexist comment that I have heard in this chamber for a very long time. It is a very serious matter. It is an appalling thing to say to any woman in this chamber, and I would call on the member for Lingiari to write a personal letter of apology for what he has said about our foreign minister. I look at the member for Jagajaga, and you would be equally disgusted. It is a terrible thing that was said about any woman in this House. I have to say it is a disgrace, and I call on the member for Lingiari to do the right thing for all women in this chamber and write a personal letter of apology.

There are so many ways in which we are contributing to the community. In my electorate alone millions and millions of dollars are flowing into my community in a whole range of different ways: disability, health, family violence and community legal services. We have not heard anything from those opposite about our Stronger Communities fund. This is an initiative of our government where we will be providing $150,000 in every electorate to support community organisations to build stronger communities. It is really unfortunate when there has been a fair degree of bipartisanship on this particular initiative that we have not even heard it mentioned.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme is one of the most significant contributions to our community in a generation, and what have we heard from members opposite? Absolutely nothing. We are so proud to be hosting the National Disability Insurance Agency headquarters in Geelong. More than 3,300 people have already reaped the benefits in the Barwon trial. Let me remind members opposite that, when we came into government, we inherited an efficiency dividend—a cut—to NDIS support packages that the member for Jagajaga would know all about. It was a cut of $44.9 million, and we reversed it. That is one of the many ways in which we are reversing the damage caused by members opposite when they were in government. The NDIS is a once-in-a-generation transformation for people with a disability, and we are proudly leading the way in rolling out the NDIS right across Australia.

I want to refer briefly to the terrible scourge of ice. There is again a lot of bipartisanship in relation to this issue. Ten or so days ago I visited Foundation 61 and met with Rob Lytzki. He provides long-term rehabilitation and does an incredible job with this organisation. A hundred people are on his waiting list. People are dying on his waiting list. These ice summits have been made a joke of by members opposite, but they are reaping a lot of results as we feed that into the National Ice Taskforce. I have supported the call for more funding for long-term rehabilitation beds, and we see here that the state Minister for Mental Health, Martin Foley, has not. That is very unfortunate because, as we know, ice is not a nine-to-five problem. We need to keep the bipartisanship on these issues, and what we are seeing opposite is very unfortunate. Rather than play politics, let's join together to fight this dreaded scourge.

Across my community and across this great nation, we are contributing in so many ways to building stronger communities, and I am very proud of the contribution that our government is making.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion has concluded.