Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Can I ask that the Greens' support for those amendments be recorded?

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Yes, that will be recorded.

Question negatived.

by leave—I move Australian Greens amendments (1) to (4) on sheet 8910 together:

(1) Schedule 4, item 26, page 26 (line 6), omit "or (4)", substitute ", (4) or (4A)".

[extend eligibility to health care card holders]

(2) Schedule 4, item 26, page 27 (line 6), omit "or (4)", substitute ", (4) or (4A)".

[extend eligibility to health care card holders]

(3) Schedule 4, item 26, page 29 (after line 4), after subsection 308(4), insert:

Qualified for low income health care card

(4A) Subject to subsection (5) of this section, this subsection applies to a person on a day if the person is qualified for a health care card on that day under section 1061ZO.

[extend eligibility to health care card holders]

(4) Schedule 4, item 26, page 29 (line 6), omit "or (4)", substitute ", (4) or (4A)".

Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

Amendment (3)

Amendment (3) is framed as a request because it would amend Schedule 4 of the bill in a way that would increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 242 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 .

The effect of the amendment would be to extend the economic support payment to persons qualified for a health care card under section 1061ZO of the Social Security Act 1991 . As such, the amendments would expand eligibility for the economic support payment and would therefore increase the amount of expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 242 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 .

Amendments (1), (2) and (4)

Amendments (1), (2), and (4) are consequential on amendment (3).

Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

Amendment (3)

If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 242 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 then it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that the amendment be moved as a request.

Amendments (1), (2) and (4)

These amendments are consequential on the request. It is the practice of the Senate that amendments that are consequential on an amendment framed as a request may also be framed as requests.

This is about giving people that are on the low-income healthcare card access to the $750 payment. I have a question for the minister, and that is: why were low-income healthcare cardholders left out of the bonus of $750? Given it's a low-income healthcare card and, by its very nature, it's for people who are on low incomes, why were they left out when people holding seniors healthcare cards were included?