Wednesday, 29 March 2017
Social Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2017; Consideration in Detail
by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) to (7) together:
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2), omit the table item.
(2) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 4), omit the table item.
(3) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 5), omit the table item.
(4) Schedule 1, page 3 (lines 1 to 21), omit the Schedule.
(5) Schedule 3, page 6 (line 1) to page 16 (line 35), omit the Schedule.
(6) Schedule 4, page 17 (lines 1 to 9), omit the Schedule.
(7) Title, page 1 (line 2), omit "family assistance and".
As the member for Grayndler usefully pointed out, we could do these amendments one by one and we could divide on them one by one. I was actually going to do this in a minute, but now that the Leader of the House is so up on things we might as well remind them that this government wants to take $1.4 billion out of the pockets of families. That is actually what you are doing. That is actually what this bill that you have all voted for right now is all about. All of you, go out into your electorates and tell all the families—1½ million families—that you are going to take money out of their pockets. That is what you have just voted for. This detailed amendment is trying to take that out of the bill. No doubt, in a minute, you will all do the same thing again—you will all vote to keep it in the bill. You are all like lemmings. You are just going to do what you are told. You do not care what the families in your electorate actually think. Now, he has come over because he still does not know what is going on!
I just say to the minister at the table that the purpose of these amendments is to take all of these cuts, which are going to hurt the poorest people in the country, out of the bill so that we do not have so many people losing so much money as a result of this government going back to the 2014 budget well and hitting very vulnerable Australians.
A division having been called and the bells being/having been rung—
We have no idea what the amendments are. With all due respects to that opposition spokesperson, it would have been nice if she had told us what we were voting on. We are being asked to vote here without any knowledge of what we are voting on. Without criticising the chair, I must emphasise to the opposition spokesperson—