Senate debates

Monday, 1 December 2008

Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (Further 2008 Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2008

Second Reading

12:38 pm

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

We have had an interjection from the other side saying ‘How can they possibly be worse off?’ Well, I will put it to the Australian people to work that out. In the first budget, the government ripped $113 million out of veterans entitlements with those two measures alone. I understand, as I am sure all veterans across Australia do, that if you are $113 million worse off through two entitlements then you are worse off. I do not think it takes a rocket scientist to work that out.

I do not want to verbal the government, but it certainly appears to be intended to shift a veterans entitlement into some sort of a welfare payment. Certainly, in real terms people would, under those circumstances, be shifting from an entitlement that is a very special entitlement that recognises the very special contribution that veterans and their partners have made to this country. Because of the changes, there is the potential that instead of receiving an entitlement after 12 months you suddenly would simply be receiving Newstart. That is something that we think is completely unacceptable. It absolutely ignores the often life-long commitment given and the stress endured by many partners in support of our veterans when they return from serving our country.

The changes to the age eligibility proposed in this bill demonstrate that the government now recognise that veterans are worse off under this government and that they are attempting to rectify bad policy on the run. The coalition strongly believes that veterans are entitled to special entitlements, particularly as a way of recognising the special contribution and sacrifices made not only by the men and women who have served overseas and served our country but also by their partners.

I must also make the point that the changes made by the government after it was elected have attacked the income of veterans. This is from a government that came to office claiming to support veterans. It has been all talk from the government—plenty of headline-grabbing announcements followed up by half-baked policy. They have not even defrosted this pie. Talk about half baked—it is still hard in the middle. I am not surprised about the number of veterans, particularly those who supported the government, who would be looking to get their money back.

We have got policy on the run that is being dictated by a razor gang determined to slash spending. It can only lead to a reduction in pension and entitlement payments. This is what the opposition said would happen. This is what we predicted when these cuts were announced in the budget. We now see the attack on the veterans coming home to bite the government. I have to say that I will always acknowledge good behaviour, and I acknowledge that the amendments the government are putting forward do, to some degree, ameliorate the pain that they have caused the veteran community.

As I alluded to earlier in this speech, we have a number of amendments that we will be moving to this schedule in the legislation because we do not believe that the amendments that will be brought by the government—we have yet to hear them and we will see how they go—will go far enough to ensure that the very special contribution made by the veteran community to this country is acknowledged through their entitlements.

Comments

No comments