Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

As much as I would like to get into a ‘my mandate is bigger than your mandate’ philosophical discussion with the senators in the chamber, my pleasant task tonight is to talk about one aspect of the legislation before us in the Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (2008 Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2008 which is something that the Democrats have been campaigning for for a long time, and that is the extension of the baby bonus to adoptive parents who happen to adopt a child over the age of two years.

I would like to commend the government on that change. I know that when the baby bonus was first introduced the Democrats made it clear that we were concerned at the then only 26-week period in which adoptive parents were eligible to claim the baby bonus. We campaigned and were successful, thanks to the efforts of the previous government and, I believe, particularly Minister Patterson at the time. We saw that extended in 2005, as I recall, to two years. But, if anyone here is familiar with some of the issues, expenses and rules involved in adoption, particularly intercountry adoption, they will know that the two-year period was not really satisfactory, given the number of adoptions that take place. So I am really glad to see that the government has adopted this particular measure—no pun intended.

I did in fact introduce a private member’s bill to this effect in March this year, and I was getting a little concerned that I had not received any feedback from the office of the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. I had urged them to support the legislation. That was met with stony silence. Now I know why. Again, I commend them.

I think it is worth reminding members of the community and members of this place of some of the issues involved in the adoption process. I was looking at some statistics from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare which illustrate that the number of children adopted from overseas countries has more than doubled over the last 25 years and, as an overall proportion, accounts for seven of every 10 adoptions. Yet, despite the increase in intercountry adoptions, the overall number of adoptions in Australia has plummeted from almost 10,000 children 35 years ago to 568 children in 2006-07. There were 568 adoptions last financial year—slightly less than the 576 children adopted the previous year. Nationally, three-quarters of the children taken into new homes last financial year were aged under five, with more than 55 per cent being female. These figures which I put on record tonight highlight the relatively small number of parents who adopt. Therefore, the inclusion of this group in the baby bonus legislation is quite inexpensive, relatively speaking, but will provide much-needed financial support.

Some senators may be aware of the fact that in some states—for example, Victoria—there are requirements for those parents who adopt a child to stay home for 12 months following the placement of that child in their new home to ensure that that child settles into family life. Many of us who are biological parents do not face those same policy requirements or that stipulation, and yet we are entitled to the baby bonus. Many of these adoptive parents and their families have been missing out, and, arguably, in many cases, have quite onerous additional financial and other issues with which to deal. So this is a very positive and relatively inexpensive measure.

In relation to the age range, I place on record that in the 2005-06 financial year, 118 children aged over two years were adopted from overseas. That gives you an idea of the statistics—just how many children are actually over that two-year age level and whose parents, therefore, have missed out on the baby bonus previously. As a consequence of their children’s age, these parents have been unable to access any form of financial assistance in that sense.

There is one ‘but’ I might add. As honourable members would be aware, the proposed change in relation to adoptive parents claiming the baby bonus does not come into effect until 1 January 2009, along with the means testing, of course. In that respect, I think it would have been nice to give this additional measure immediate effect—or at least effect from the date of assent. Wouldn’t it have been nice to give that measure and that assistance to these families that little bit earlier?

Tonight I received an email. Madam Acting Deputy President, you find when you are leaving this place that you get a lot of nice and kind emails. This was another one of those. It stated as a reminder:

… the delay in bringing in the change to the baby bonus until 1 January still means that families will miss out. We are in the … position now of almost not being concerned by our ongoing wait (21 months this week) for allocation as we know our child will be over 2 and to miss out twice—

this is from someone who missed out last time because their child was not eligible—

will be a hard pill to swallow. No doubt, as soon as—

it is quite moving—

we see a photo of our new child, not even the frustration of missing out on the payment again will be enough to stop us from wanting to get to—

name of country—

as quickly as possible to bring him/her home.

This has been an ongoing campaign. It has been one that the Democrat senators have been particularly committed to. We have been glad to have had a couple of wins along the way. Might I say it is really nice when leaving this place to be speaking to this bill—I hope this is my final bill; I think four bills today is possibly enough—and having a win for the party. I think this is indicative of the kind of work that we have successfully done over many years. It does not always happen immediately, but it can happen. If I may implore the government ministers and parliamentary secretaries on duty, wouldn’t it be nice to bring this measure up a little sooner?