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

[by video link] I too would like to take note of this important report, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report on ParentsNext and the instrument that extends and changes ParentsNext. This is an issue that I have raised repeatedly in the Senate. I'm really pleased to see the recommendation that this program be made voluntary. This is a very familiar recommendation to me given that it's basically the same one that I made for the Australian Greens in our additional comments to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee inquiry into the program, which I referred and chaired in 2018. I urge the government to read this report and to implement this recommendation. Rather than being supported to raise their children, women are being subjected to a mandatory program that is resulting in adverse outcomes such as having to give up work days and study to meet program requirements or losing their payment because their children's medical appointments conflict with appointments with providers.

This program is an ideological program that impacts on people on income support. It's heartbreaking to read the submissions and the points that were raised by the people that submitted to the inquiry, who, as Senator Thorpe has just outlined, are single mothers, which this program predominantly affects. It feels like deja vu, because the issues that were raised in this inquiry are the same issues that were raised, or very similar issues that were raised, during the Senate Community Affairs Committee's inquiry into this program. The issues raised in this inquiry were grouped into categories that included:

3.4 Submitters and witnesses primarily submitted that the ParentsNext program should either cease, or if it were to continue that the Targeted Compliance Framework should no longer be applied to it, and participation should be voluntary.

This program takes choice and control from women. If the government seeks to control women through this program, receiving social security in the form of a parenting payment should not call into question the quality of a recipient's parenting. This program views mothers of young children as unemployed workers, when, in fact, they are working long hours raising the next generation. Parents particularly see it—single parents should not be forced into employment.

One of the key flaws and sources of distress for sole parents is the constant threat that a payment will be suspended or cancelled and, then, how do they support their family. Studies show that people who have been subjected to harsh compliance policies experience very high levels of psychological distress which interferes with their capacity for long-term planning and effective engagement with employment. And we've heard that loud and clear through the submissions to this inquiry as well as to the Community Affairs Committee's inquiry in 2018. Children are living in poverty because this government is cutting off their parents' access to income. When a parent's payment is suspended or cancelled it is their children who face the consequences. The government shouldn't be trying at every turn to police people's lives or cut them off from their payments that are vital to their wellbeing and particularly, and most importantly, to their families' wellbeing.

This program is a dud, it hurts people and it should be cancelled. Then, the government, if the government is genuine in supporting parents that want to engage voluntarily, should develop a program in consultation with those that are being affected to find the best ways of supporting any pre-employment programs or support programs for the people that the government claims they're aiming to support. ParentsNext is a failure, it hurts people and should cease. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.