Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (14) on sheet 8108:

(1) Schedule 1, page 5 (after line 2), after item 5, insert:

5A Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

fourth income threshold has the meaning given by subclause 3(4) of Schedule 2.

(2) Schedule 1, item 41, page 36, (lines 26 and 27), omit step 4 of the method statement, substitute:

Step 4. Work out the hourly rate of CCS for the individual for each of those sessions of care (see clause 2).

If the applicable percentage is 0% for each of those sessions of care, the amount of child care subsidy for the individual for the week, for those sessions, is nil.

Otherwise, go to step 5.

(3) Schedule 1, item 41, page 38 (after line 8), at the end of subclause 2(1), add:

Note: If the applicable percentage for a session of care is 0% (see table item 6 of subclause 3(1)), the hourly rate of CCS for the individual for the session of care is nil.

(4) Schedule 1, item 41, page 39 (table item 4), omit "upper income threshold", substitute "fourth income threshold".

(5) Schedule 1, item 41, page 39 (after table item 4), insert:

(6) Schedule 1, item 41, page 39 (table item 5), omit "5", substitute "6".

(7) Schedule 1, item 41, page 39 (table item 5), omit "20%", substitute "0%".

(8) Schedule 1, item 41, page 40 (after line 16), after the definition of third income threshold, insert:

fourth income threshold means the lower income threshold plus $274,290.

(9) Schedule 1, item 41, page 40 (line 18), omit "$274,290", substitute "$284,290".

(10) Schedule 1, item 92, page 82 (lines 13 to 15), omit all the words from "Or, the individual" to and including "the year.".

(11) Schedule 1, item 92, page 83 (line 8), omit "passed;", substitute "passed.".

(12) Schedule 1, item 92, page 83 (lines 9 to 11), omit paragraph 67DB(2) (d).

(13) Schedule 1, item 92, page 83 (lines 12 to 26), omit subsections 67DB(3) and (4).

(14) Schedule 1, item 92, page 83 (line 28), omit "(5)", substitute "(3)".

To save time, and because I did have something to say during the second reading debate, all I will say is that if this bill went through without this amendment you would have taxpayers getting 20 per cent of the cost of their child care paid for families earning $350,000 to $500,000 a year. I think that is a disgrace. If you pass this amendment, it will save the government $100 million over a three-year period if families on $350,000 to $500,000 have to pay their own childcare costs. I was amazed when I discovered that, even now, people earning half a million dollars a year get 50 per cent of their childcare costs paid by taxpayers. The Labor Party and the Greens have been talking all night about hard-up people. I am not anti child care, I do not follow Senator Leyonhjelm all the way, but I cannot see how you can justify voting against this. Are you now going to vote in favour of 20 per cent of childcare fees being paid for people whose family income is half a million a year? By cutting this, we are saving $100 million. In the big picture it is not much, but it is a start. I do not want to take up any more time. I commend the amendment to the Senate.