Senate debates

Monday, 5 September 2022

Bills

Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022; Second Reading

11:16 am

Photo of Dean SmithDean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | | Hansard source

I rise this morning to speak to a bill that I introduced to the Senate in the last sitting fortnight, the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022. It comes hot on the heels of last week's Jobs and Skills Summit, and the only question that people need to ask themselves at the end of this contribution is: why must age pensioners and veterans wait for this initiative? You'll think it a bit of a coincidence that this bill, introduced into the Senate in the last fortnight, replicates—not completely—one of the 36 initiatives that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said deserved immediate attention on Friday afternoon. This private senator's bill is a timely, immediate solution to two challenges that are facing our country. The challenges are real, they're immediate, and they're beginning to hurt. The first of those two challenges is the rising cost of living. There is not a household in our country today that is not experiencing the devastating effect of rising cost-of-living challenges, whether it be food or petrol or interest rates. The other immediate challenge is affecting every small and medium-sized business—indeed, every large business—across our country: in every town, in every city, in every suburb. This bill will go a long way to immediately addressing cost-of-living challenges for age pensioners and veterans and go a very, very long way in meeting the labour shortage challenges being faced by small and medium-sized businesses in every community across our country.

You might like to ask yourself: why, after two days of a jobs and skills summit, can Anthony Albanese, the new Prime Minister, and Jim Chalmers, the new Treasurer, have a grand bargain with big business, big unions and big government, but they can't legislate a grand bargain for age pensioners and veterans today? This bill doubles the Age and Veterans Service Pension Work Bonus Scheme, the amount that can be earned without impacting pension payments, increasing it from $300, as it currently is, to $600 per fortnight, or $1,200 a fortnight for a couple. Working pensioners will also continue to accrue the unused work bonus scheme income up to a $2,800 cap, exempting future earnings for pension income test purposes. Importantly, this bill removes disincentives for working pensioners. Age pensions are currently cancelled where a recipient's total income exceeds the income test for a 12-week period. The pensioner concession card access is subject to this same test and time frame.

Under this bill, pensions will be suspended for up to two years instead, during which time pensioners will undergo a simplified process to resume the pension if their income falls to the prescribed level. Both age and disability support pensioners will be able to keep their pensioner concession card for two years under these circumstances as an acknowledgement of the importance of the concessions that the pensioner concession card offers working pensioners. Pension partners of working pensioners will enjoy the same pension resumption and pensioner concession card arrangements for a two-year period.

Importantly, this bill includes an annual review mechanism requiring a ministerial review to be tabled in parliament on the operation of the amendments and sunsetting of the amendments every 12 months unless determined otherwise by notifiable instruments. That is necessary because we would hope—indeed, this whole parliament would hope—that cost-of-living pressures in our country would ease, and we would hope that labour shortage pressures in our country would also ease. Having a review mechanism makes sure that taxpayers' money gets spent wisely.

You could be excused for thinking that that sounds very much like the idea that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers trumpeted on Friday afternoon. You would be wrong. Labor's plan is less generous. Labor's plan is temporary. Labor's age pensioner and veterans reform initiative for pensioners can earn them an extra $4,000 for this financial year. This is an extra $4,000 on top of the $7,800 that is the maximum income allowed to be earned under the work bonus currently, bringing the maximum under Labor's improved work bonus plan to $11,800. This is an extra $153 on top of the $300 that can be earned every fortnight. The maximum fortnightly earning under Labor's plan is just $453. Labor's plan will allow pensioners to work an extra 4¼ hours every fortnight, or just over two hours every week, before they're financially penalised.

Under the coalition's age pensioner and veterans reform initiative, pensioners can earn an extra $7,800 for this financial year and for future years. This is an extra $7,800 on top of the $7,800 that is the maximum income allowed to be earned under the work bonus currently, bringing the maximum amount that can be earned under the coalition's improved plan to $5,600 a year. This is an extra $300 on top of the $300 that can be earned every fortnight. The maximum fortnightly earning under the coalition's plan is $600. The coalition's plan allows pensioners to work an extra eight hours every fortnight, or four hours every week, before they are financially penalised. Why does Labor, under its plan, want to make age pensioners and veterans worse off than they would be under the coalition's plan?

This bill sits before a Senate committee at the moment. That Senate committee has taken submissions. That Senate committee has not yet had a public hearing, because Labor senators thus far have not made themselves available to participate in a public hearing. Not only did Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers bring to the Jobs and Skills Summit, at the eleventh hour, a plan that is worse than the coalition's, but Labor senators don't even want to have a public inquiry into the coalition's plan, because members of the community would realise that Labor's plan lacks generosity, that Labor's plan is temporary.

Photo of Paul ScarrPaul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

They're embarrassed.

Photo of Dean SmithDean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | | Hansard source

They are very embarrassed, Senator Scarr. They're late to the party, and they've come embarrassed.

Let me be clear: this is not a proposal for charity. This is an economic measure that deserves support now because small businesses are being hurt now. Age pensioners and veterans are experiencing real cost-of-living pressures now. Here is a bill. We have eight parliamentary sitting days before the federal budget. Senator Ayres, Senator Ciccone and Labor senators could come back to the Senate at any time over the next two weeks and say: 'Let's put politics aside. Let's be the best selves we can be, and let's endorse a plan that delivers for age pensioners and veterans and small businesses across the country.'

What have some of those submissions to the inquiry had to say? Let me acknowledge the great and consistent advocacy that National Seniors Australia and Ian Henschke in particular have done both prior to the last election and since the election to get this initiative up. This initiative does not look exactly like the National Seniors initiative, but their advocacy and commitment to supporting age pensioners facing real cost-of-living challenges in our country deserve to be acknowledged. National Seniors Australia has said in a public submission to the committee:

National Seniors Australia welcomes the proposal put forward by Senator Dean Smith to double the Work Bonus limit.

… … …

    Labour shortages across our agricultural communities are crippling. Grain Producers Australia, in its submission, says:

    GPA supports the positive intent of this Bill, to introduce changes to the social security entitlements and payments for Australia's veterans and pensioners, to help incentivise greater participation in the agricultural and rural workforce, by introducing more flexible rules and modern arrangements.

    Australian agriculture has faced long-term structural challenges with labour supply and whilst these problems are widely recognised, lasting solutions continue to elude policy-makers and governments.

    That would have been true until this bill was introduced into the Senate. Indeed, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry from my home state of Western Australia has said:

    In this context, it is those economies that can extract the most out of their local workforces that will gain a competitive edge in the global economy.

    … … …

    ABS data shows there is currently significant latent demand for over 65s to work. In 2019, the average hours of additional work sought by people over 65 was 685,000 hours. The total number of hours has since swelled and now stands at 724,000 hours.

    The Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said:

    During the current skills and labour shortages, pensioners and veterans can help provide business with the workers they need to keep operating. Not only can they fill roles, but the community can benefit from their experience in training, managing, and mentoring other staff as well as lifting overall productivity and bringing broader skills into the labour market.

    I would have thought that if Premier Dan Andrews thinks this is a good initiative, there surely can be no other excuses for not legislating it immediately. Dan Andrews supports the idea of older workers being able to enter the workforce to help address cost-of-living challenges and help address labour shortages, as does the New South Wales Treasurer, Matt Kean. What more is needed? The Premier of Victoria, Dan Andrews; the New South Wales Treasurer, Matt Kean—what more is needed to convince Labor that this is an initiative that should be legislated now?

    I think it's very true that Peter Dutton, the Leader of the Opposition, did something very unorthodox for a new opposition leader following an election: he came up with a policy idea, which is this idea, on 26 June. There was enthusiastic head-nodding across this country because people understand this is a sensible solution. I think Senator Ayres himself is nodding, 'Yes, Senator Smith, I think that is a sensible solution.' But Labor's enthusiasm is lukewarm. If Labor were enthusiastic, they would have done this not after 101 days of being in government; they would have done it immediately. If Labor were not lukewarm, they would have made this the first initiative of the Jobs and Skills Summit, not the last. If Labor were enthusiastic and not lukewarm, they would be saying to pensioners and veterans: 'We will not make you wait. We will not make you wait until the budget. We will not make you wait until the legislation that comes out of the budget later this year.' Age pensioners and veterans are saying, 'Why are we waiting?' I hope that Senator Ayres, in his contribution, will be able to satisfy that question.

    And why is Labor's proposal less generous than the coalition's? It is because, in the submissions to the committee inquiry, one of the submitters has made it very, very clear that the initiative will pay for itself. I hope that when I walk out of the Senate chamber I'll get a call from the chair of the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee to say, 'Senator Smith, you're quite right. You caught us out. We've been avoiding a public inquiry on your bill, so we're going to have a public inquiry soon and we're going to get that report out because this is an initiative that deserves to be supported, and it deserves to be supported now.'

    The Jobs and Skills Summit did deliver a grand bargain for big unions, big government and big business. I've been around long enough to remember that once upon a time it was called the accord. But, Senator Ayres—indeed, all Labor senators—age pensioners and veterans in our community deserve their grand bargain, and they deserve it now. This bill can be legislated in the next eight sitting days, and I look forward to that being the outcome.

    11:31 am

    Photo of Tim AyresTim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | | Hansard source

    I always enjoy Senator Smith's contributions and listen to them very carefully. I do think his capacity to confect enthusiasm and certitude on this piece of proposed legislation should be an exemplar to all senators today and into the future. It really is a remarkable thing. I don't criticise Senator Smith for bringing this piece of legislation, the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022, to the parliament but, honestly, we know he didn't draft it. We know it came from somewhere else. If he had drafted it, it would be much more elegantly worded and much more politically sharp. We have a bill that was drafted in the opposition leader's office.

    There are three key words in Senator Smith's contribution: 'beginning to hurt'. That's what he said. Cost-of-living pressures are just 'beginning to hurt'. Labor supply issues are just 'beginning to hurt'. They've been a problem for the last 105 days! They didn't exist prior to the last 105 days! They're just 'beginning to hurt'. I just say to senators opposite: when you do go to the government party room, or if you ever knock on the door of the Leader of the Opposition's office and you get in, just say: 'We need a better plan. This isn't going very far. Nobody on earth is convinced, least of all ordinary Australians, that cost-of-living pressures are suddenly a new development that's happened over the last 105 days.'

    The Morrison government's approach on these questions is utterly sclerotic. There is no action. Mr Morrison said he didn't want to leave a legacy. He never said a truer word. Nothing the Morrison government did on the cost of living or labour supply troubled the scorers. In fact, as Senator Payne well knows, some of the measures that the Morrison government undertook, particularly during the COVID crisis, rode in exactly the wrong direction.

    It's as if this debate over labour shortages and skills shortages and the cost of living occurred only over the last 105 days. It's really been a debate, of course, that's been going for well over the last three years. Where was this proposition in 2019? Where was it in 2020? Where were Senator Smith and his colleagues all through 2021? Where were they on this proposition—generous as Senator Smith describes it—in the first few months of 2022? They were nowhere, of course; they were defending Mr Morrison. You can't find too many of them over there publicly or privately who want to defend Mr Morrison now but they were all up to their ears in it, defending Mr Morrison day in, day out. Senator Smith wasn't doing it very loudly but there he was, you could find him. If pushed, publicly, he would stoutly defend him.

    There was zero action on labour supply, zero action on cost of living. In fact, the last government did worse. I will never forget when Mr Morrison sent the message to temporary visa holders to go home. I remember walking around in the Sydney CBD seeing piles of furniture out the front of blocks of flats. You would see food queues—food queues in Australia in 2020, 2021—as people were sent packing, and now these characters want to come in here and complain about skills shortages. Where were they then? They are full of big ideas today but were utterly vacant on big ideas over the last few years.

    There was a place for big ideas about our shared national problems in the labour market. It was the last two days of last week. It wasn't a bad place, if you are interested in big ideas about the future of the labour market, the Jobs and Skills Summit that the Prime Minister convened. It was denigrated by Senator Smith but it was a place for big ideas, a place for Australians to work together on some of the big national problems and, if I can say, set the tone. The leadership of the trade union movement was there. Business, large and small, was there. The stakeholders went. Key organisations, they were all there. Experts—people who know things stuff instead of just saying things about stuff—many of them were there; many of them spoke up. All of the states, Labor and Liberal, were there. Mr Littleproud went, good on him; it was the right call. It would have been ridiculous for him not to attend. That's where Australia was. That's where the leadership of corporate Australia—not everyone could get a ticket—was, and many of them participated in the hundred mini summits the government convened in the weeks leading up to the big summit.

    Where were Mr Dutton and the Liberal Party? Where were they? Mr Dutton was outside, on the radio and the television, denigrating the participants who went, pouring scorn on the participants who went, trying to encourage a bit of scepticism in the community about the idea that Australians would get together, recognising their own interests but putting the national interest first, and try and deal with some of these questions. Where was Mr Dutton? It was the old Morrison politics of division; that's where he was. I reckon if Senator Smith had been invited he probably would have gone too.

    I listened to Senator Cash on Radio National this morning, more of the same nonsense. She wants to denigrate trade unions officials, wants to denigrate the businesses large and small who attended, who are actually coming to grips with some of the challenges that we are facing. It was more reminiscent of a young Liberals' speech. It really made me think how difficult it is in those first months and years facing up to dealing with the legacy of a sclerotic and hopeless government—

    Photo of Dean SmithDean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | | Hansard source

    There are a few young Liberal people here too.

    Photo of Tim AyresTim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | | Hansard source

    there are a few young Labor people here too, don't worry—walking into a period where suddenly you reflect on what it is you should have been up to over the last few years. If Senator Smith had picked up the phone and given one of us a call we could have told him last week, on Friday, what it was that the Prime Minister had announced, amongst 36 other measures. The Prime Minister announced the work bonus measure as recently as last Friday, and there was more discussion about it over the weekend. I want to spell out some of the key provisions of that announcement. The income bank will assist working social security pensioners over age pension age, including those receiving the aged pension, the disability support pension and the carer payment. It will also assist some of those receiving veterans entitlements, such as the service pension and income support supplement.

    From 1 December 2022, pensioners over the age pension age will have their work bonus income bank credited with $4,000. This will take the maximum work bonus income bank from $7,800 to $11,800 until 30 June 2023. The increase will be added to each age pensioner's work bonus income bank upfront. That means that every age pensioner could have an extra $4,000 of employment income disregarded from the income test from the start, rather than accumulating it over time. Age pensioners who currently work and have already accrued the maximum income balance of $7,800 will now be able to have up to $11,800 disregarded for the purposes of the age pension income test. This provides a very strong incentive for those who do not currently work to start earning additional income if they wish to do so.

    It's a significant reform. Age pensioners who are currently working and have already benefited from the full value of the concession will have their income bank topped up by $4,000. A pensioner who is working and has used some of their income bank will also receive the $4,000 top-up. The maximum income bank limit will return to $7,800 at the end of this financial year. By providing an immediate top up of $4,000, rather than allowing it to accrue over time as currently happens, this measure will provide an immediate benefit to any pensioner who starts work or works additional hours and is going to help address pressing labour shortages in a practical and immediate way. The work bonus operates in addition to the income test free area. Under the work bonus, the first $300 of work income a fortnight is not counted in the pension income test and as such does not reduce the amount of pension received. Pensioners are able to build up any unused amount of the $300 fortnightly exemption in a work bonus income bank up to a total of $7,800.

    I acknowledge that in all of these areas—for veterans; pensioners; disability pensioners; participants in the NDIS; long-term unemployed Australians, particularly First Nations Australians; and women, whose participation rate is not as high in the labour market and are participating in areas of the labour market where incomes are lower and employment is more contingent—there is more work to do. What I say to the chamber is that we have as a government moved to deal with this question carefully and in a way that includes all of the Australian community. We have done it in a careful, methodical way. It is a significant improvement, but there is of course more to do on all of these questions. The way to get the best out of Australians and Australian institutions is of course to play a leadership role from government and encourage people to work together, not to encourage Australians to think that there might be some sectional advantage in playing with the politics of division—a politics that some on the other side are all too comfortable playing. And we'll continue to work through these issues with the trade union movement and with business, large and small, to develop practical solutions and to do the kinds of things Senator Smith has only recently become so worried about. The cost of living and labour shortages are issues that the Morrison government talked about but didn't lift a finger to resolve.

    On the cost-of-living questions, there have been some announcements today about indexation and general support for age-pensioner and service payments. Regarding the three pillars of the retirement system—compulsory superannuation, voluntary savings and the age pension—the age pension is now the largest component of social security expenditure. Expenditure in 2022-23 is around $54 billion. A significant announcement is being made today about indexation, which will see the JobSeeker payment for singles without children increasing by $25.70 a fortnight and significant increases to other government social security payments. These payments will increase from 20 September. That reflects a serious contribution—the largest indexation for quite some time—that will make a real contribution on cost-of-living issues. (Time expired)

    11:46 am

    Photo of Janet RiceJanet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

    I want to start by thanking Senator Smith for his focus on income support in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022. Senator Smith and I have a long history of working collaboratively on complex issues, and I want to particularly acknowledge his measured and very considered approach on some of the challenging issues facing us in the parliament.

    This bill fits within a framework of needing to increase people's well-being right across the board. The Australian Greens believe that a socially just, democratic and sustainable society should be underpinned by a guaranteed liveable income, complemented by the provision of universal social services. We believe that everyone should have enough to live on and essential services to enable them to fully participate in society. That is why we want to see the development and adoption of a comprehensive suite of tools to measure poverty across the range of communities in Australia, including a national definition of poverty and ultimately the eradication of poverty in Australia. We can choose to eradicate poverty in Australia. A key step in that process would be the reform of our income support system in its entirety to ensure a guaranteed liveable income for all.

    This bill goes nowhere near a guaranteed liveable income, and the government's version of it falls even further short. But it does include a number of measures to better support pensioners, making it easier for pensioners to earn more before their pension is reduced. The changes in this bill would also make it easier for people to keep their pensioner concession card when they earn above the income threshold in a 12-week period. The questions this bill is addressing—of how to balance the income test and ensure that we're providing support for everyone who needs it—are really important questions. In reflecting on the measures in this bill I am of course very conscious that the Greens were actually the only party in the last election with a clear proposal to provide earlier access to the age pension. As we said at the time, lowering the eligibility age will expand access to the pension for hundreds of thousands of older Australians who are currently living in poverty and will provide a well-deserved earlier retirement with guaranteed income support for people who have worked their entire lives on low wages in order to take care of their families.

    Since the Rudd government's 2009 increase to the pension age from 65 to 67, Liberal and Labor have been failing low-income older Australians. Across the country, thousands of older Australians who are approaching retirement age have limited capacity to continue working or have been excluded from the labour market entirely. Thousands more are in physically demanding minimum-wage jobs, forced to keep working an additional two years because of successive Labor and Liberal governments failing to give them the support they need. So we need to be doing more than just enabling pensioners who are able to work to increase the hours that they can work. In particular, we need to be supporting people who, at the end of their working life, having worked hard all their life, don't have to be literally breaking their backs in manual labour, as many of them are—whether it's working in hospitals, whether it's doing heavy lifting—just to survive.

    Of course, the measure that we took to the last election of reducing the age that people could access the pension was in addition to our proposal to increase the rate of payments to all recipients to $88 a day, so that people on JobSeeker, people on pensions, people on youth allowance and people on the disability support pension would all receive an income payment above the poverty line, so that nobody was languishing in poverty. We also wanted to remove compulsory obligations—those largely pointless tasks and hoops and forms and meetings that people on income support have to subject themselves to to receive income support. As an aside, there is increasing evidence that some people—more people—are actively choosing to not access income support. That's not because they don't need it. They are choosing to try and survive with no income at all because of these so-called mutual obligation processes that are proposed.

    I met a woman earlier this year who was homeless on the streets of south Melbourne. She told me that she was actively choosing to not have any income from the government at all because the whole processes of having to go through the mutual obligations was worsening her mental health so much that she decided that being homeless and living on the streets with no income at all was actually going to be better for her mental health than having to jump through the pointless mutual obligation hoops that she was being forced to.

    So, as well as reforms that benefit pensioners, we want to ensure that no-one, no matter how old they are, is living in poverty. We know that poverty is a political choice. It's a choice that the government is making, and it's a choice that the previous government made. And this is at the same time that they are choosing to hand out billions of dollars to billionaires and billions of dollars to the ultra wealthy.

    Senator Ayres talked about the very important measure that the Treasurer has been spruiking today for increases to income support. This is actually only just keeping pace with inflation. In announcing these measures, the Treasurer said:

    We know that it won't solve every problem for everybody but it's important that we try and make sure that those payments keep up. That's what the indexation is about. It will be welcome even as we acknowledge that times will still be tough for a lot of people.

    Yes, indeed, Treasurer. Times are indeed very tough, and your government is choosing to keep them that way. The government is choosing not to increase the woefully inadequate rates of income support for jobseekers, for pensioners, for people on the disability pension, for young people, for students. The government is choosing to keep millions of Australians living in abject poverty, where people can't afford to eat three meals a day. People are being diagnosed with malnutrition and scurvy at the same time that this government is proceeding with the stage 3 tax cuts.

    Recent analysis shows just how skewed and how wrong proceeding with the stage 3 tax cuts is in this context The Guardian reported that the richest one per cent of Australians will get as much benefit from the stage 3 tax cuts as the poorest 65 per cent combined. The tax cuts, which will cost $243 billion to 2032-33, would see $160 billion flow to men and $83 billion flow to women. Let's be clear. At the same time that we are debating this bill, which is going to give some very modest increases to pensioners to be able to earn more, we have both sides of politics, the Liberal Party and the Labor Party alike, planning to give $244 billion to very wealthy people over the next 10 years. At the same time, the indexation that the government's touting today is worth less than $2 a day to people living on JobSeeker—$2 a day!—whereas everyone earning over $200,000, and that's everybody in this place, will get $24 a day in the stage 3 tax cuts. Two dollars a day is not enough for people facing a housing crisis, for people who are struggling to buy food.

    In the lead-up to the Jobs and Skills Summit last week, my office did a call-out for people's stories, for their experiences of being on JobSeeker and what that did to their ability to find work. Their answers were stark and sobering. One said:

    Being on JobSeeker feels like a punishment, a punishment for not being able to find work when there simply aren't enough jobs to go around. You see people around you enjoying the most basic things, like catching up with friends for a coffee, and you feel like you've been kicked when you're already down. And, to be honest, I'm one of the lucky ones: I don't have children or pets that depend on me to provide for them. When the rate was raised, I was able to buy winter clothes without worrying if I'd be cutting into the food budget. This shouldn't be a normality! No one should have to choose between a meal and a jumper. It's a punishment and it is killing people.'

    Another story:

    I am so blessed to now be in full-time employment, but in the past few years I have been on Jobseeker payments for extended periods—it was demoralising—and frightening. There was no 'safety net'—nothing to be done except watch the little bit of savings I had built up dwindle to nothing, and then every new letter in the letter box filled me with dread—another bill I had to try to negotiate not paying.

    I became depressed and fearful.

    And angry at the injustice of it all. And at the stigma—created and perpetuated even by Centrelink itself.

    Please continue to fight for those trapped in poverty.

    I can assure them that's what we Greens will continue to do.

    Senator Smith's bill has some measures that will make life easier for age pensioners, but there is so much more that needs to be done. And there's a simple answer here: we can make a different choice. We can choose to increase the rate of income support so that payment rates are above the poverty line. We can choose to care for people rather than profit. We can choose people over corporations. The Greens believe that no-one in Australia should be living in poverty, and we will keep fighting for that change.

    11:57 am

    Photo of Linda ReynoldsLinda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

    I rise to speak on Senator Dean Smith's private senators bill, the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022. Firstly, I congratulate my very good friend and colleague from Western Australia on his work and his enduring commitment to older Australians, to pensioners and to veterans not only in our home state of Western Australia, but also nationally. Contrary to what Senator Ayres told the chamber, this is a project of passion for Senator Smith. For his entire time in the Senate he has worked tirelessly for older Australians and also, in particular, for increasing grandparents' rights who have responsibility for children. This bill is the culmination of many months of consultation by Senator Smith, and others, with businesses and agricultural organisations and in particular in partnership with National Seniors Australia. As I said, it is a genuine and longstanding commitment.

    I admire greatly Senator Ayres' attempts to deflect from the very substandard proposals that the Labor Party—well after their first 100 days—have now put forward. In my contribution today I'd like to focus on the contrast between this excellent piece of public policy—and I thank Senator Rice for her comments about the legislation and about its benefits.

    As a senator for Western Australia, I do welcome and support this bill, which will improve the livelihoods not only of thousands of Australians, but thousands of Western Australian pensioners and veterans. This bill does contrast sharply with the government's long overdue announcement on an age and veterans pension income credit, and again I note that it took Senator Ayres probably 10 minutes of rewriting the history of the previous government before he was able to very lightly touch on the benefits, as he saw it, of Labor's emperor-with-no-clothes policy. I will explain why it is so deficient. As Senator Smith said, at best it is a very lukewarm response. It is a substandard measure and a very temporary measure, unlike the measures contained in this bill which are permanent for older Australians and for veterans. Sadly, this is yet another classic ALP response, one that is clearly influenced by the dead hand of the trade union movement, who are very fast becoming the de facto government of this nation. Not only is the Labor announcement too little too late for many Australians, but, as I have said, it is a very poor attempt to copy our policy that we announced in June of this year.

    Let me remind the chamber that in June the coalition announced our policy to double the amount of income that age pensioners and veterans and service pensioners can earn without reducing their pension payments. This is something that we put forward in June. As you can see, it is now sitting before a Senate committee, which, completely and utterly disgracefully, Labor is now stalling. There have been no hearings on this bill yet in the Senate committee, which is something that I also join Senator Smith in calling for.

    Let's now compare the two. Let's contrast the two policies. Our policy is to increase the amount that can be earned each fortnight from $300 to $600 for individuals or $1,200 for couples without impacting on their pension payments. Labor's plan will only allow pensioners to work an extra 4.25 hours per fortnight. That's right. I will say that again: only 4.25 hours per fortnight, which is just over two hours per week. That is pathetic.

    In contrast, under the coalition's age pension and veterans reform initiative pensioners can earn an extra $7,800 for this financial year and for future years, which, again, contrasts sharply with Labor, who are just introducing a very light-touch policy of 4.25 hours per fortnight. Again, under the dead hand of the unions, they're not making this permanent and that is a complete and utter disgrace.

    Our policy, in contrast, is an extra $7,800 on top of the $7,800, which is currently the maximum income allowance to be earned under the work bonus. This will bring the total amount per year, under our plan, to $15,600. That's an extra $300 on top of the $300 that can be earned every fortnight. The coalition's plan allows pensioners to work an extra eight hours every fortnight, or four hours every week, before they are penalised. Labor's so-called income credit will only increase the amount eligible participants can earn to $453 per fortnight. That's well short of the $600 per fortnight proposed by the coalition.

    The coalition's policy also extends the period in which age and disability support pensioners are required to reapply for payments when their employment income exceeds prescribed limits. It's also to retain access to the pensioner concession card for up to two years in these circumstances. Seniors' organisations have said to us that that is something that is very important but something that has clearly fallen on the deaf ears of those opposite.

    Also, to the dismay of senators on this side, it appears that Labor has completely cynically and unnecessarily delayed this announcement to coincide with the government's jobs summit. Not only is that unnecessary, but also it's having serious consequences on our economy. By delaying this for over 100 days eligible participants have not yet had the confidence to work. So during the first quarter of this financial year, which was a critical time in our nation's economy, people have not been able to go out and start filling some of those jobs. These are Australians who want to be in the workforce, who could have been in the workforce today providing such necessary support to businesses who are now closing, because they cannot find enough workers to assist.

    As Senator Smith asked Senator Ayres rhetorically through the chair: why are we waiting? Despite all of the revisionist history we got from Senator Ayres, there was no answer. In my own home state of Western Australia businesses and communities are battling staff shortages each and every day. Businesses are closing. Small-business owners in particular are struggling to do all of the extra hours to keep their businesses open. According to the ABS there are 107,000 people aged between 60 and 69 who are not in the labour force—they're not retired, but they are not employed—but they want to work. Australia's labour shortage, while bad right across this nation, is even worse in my home state of Western Australia. Despite that, the Labor Party, for all of their rhetoric about, 'Yes, we care about Western Australia, and we understand you're the financial engine room of our nation,' guess how many delegates we had from Western Australia? Colleagues, guess how many we had from Western Australia?

    Photo of Paul ScarrPaul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

    Ten, five?

    Photo of Linda ReynoldsLinda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

    It was seven, so you were close—seven from the state that is the most impacted by job shortages. There were seven delegates from my state.

    Photo of Paul ScarrPaul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

    Shame!

    Photo of Linda ReynoldsLinda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

    That is a complete and utter disgrace, and, as Senator Scarr describes it, it is a disgrace and a shame. In Western Australia we need every able-bodied person who can work and wants to work to be able to work and to be contributing to the workforce. We simply need this policy now. We don't need a half-baked Labor influenced policy from Labor that will provide an extra 2.25 hours per week. We need something far more substantial, and we need it now from the Labor Party.

    This is absolutely typical of a pattern that is now emerging from the Labor Party. In the first hundred days they have already broken so many promises. They have delayed making any decisions, instead going through to summits, to reviews. You wonder what they've been doing in opposition when in their first 100 days they don't have a plan. They've got a lot of fabulous rhetoric, but they don't have a plan. There is nothing more concrete and that will provide more benefits and that will be self-funded, after the first few people take up this scheme, than this piece of legislation by Senator Smith. I call on the Labor Party to at least allow hearings on this bill now in the Community Affairs Legislation Committee so that we can hear from the people who will benefit the most from this.

    The Liberals will continue to support Senator Smith's legislation. We will continue to advocate for people who are on the pension—veterans pension and age pension—people who have so much to contribute to our nation. But they have roadblocks in the way right now. I commend this bill to this chamber.

    12:08 pm

    Photo of Hollie HughesHollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | | Hansard source

    HES () (): We know that the Labor Party had been waiting for their jobs-skills talkfest before looking to do anything productive to address the skills shortage that is being faced across so many sectors across the entire country. This proposal in the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022 to allow pensioners and those on a disability support pension to work longer hours without impacting on their pension was proposed by this opposition, by the opposition leader, a substantial period of time ago, around 26 June, to start to put in train methods and ways that we could use to boost workforce shortages as quickly as possible. This is the point: we've heard lots and lots of things being talked about—increasing migration, increasing skilled and unskilled numbers, bringing people into the country, working on the visa processing system to get them through. Whilst much of that is commendable and needs to be done—probably at a much faster rate—to ensure that we can address these shortages, in both skilled and unskilled positions, we have a workforce ready to go. We have a substantial number of people who are in receipt of an age pension or disability support pension and would like to work more hours.

    But those opposite, now in government, of course opposed this up until their talkfest. Up until the Jobs and Skills Summit, it was something that would not be countenanced. Is that because it was proposed by the opposition? Is it because they have a level of pettiness that won't allow good ideas to be discussed? Is it because this is a government that isn't going to govern for all Australians? Is it a government that's only interested in governing for its union mates? We needed to make sure that John Setka, Sally McManus and the majority of participants that were at the Jobs and Skills Summit representing those unions would give this the tick of approval, because we couldn't have a situation at all where those in government upset their union mates!

    To be clear, the unions currently represent around 10 per cent of Australians in the private sector workforce, yet they had 33 seats at this summit talkfest. As Senator Reynolds just made the point, there were only seven participants from Western Australia. The Western Australians were completely overshadowed by the unions in how much say they had, what their influence was and the numbers they had representing them at this talkfest last week. To put that in context, 10 per cent of Australians are members of unions; 41 per cent of the Australian workforce is employed in small business. Guess how many seats small business had at the table? Guess how many seats representing small business, which employs 41 per cent of Australians, were at the table? One—one seat.

    Those of us on this side of the chamber are more than aware that the government has no interest in small business. They had every opportunity, but, when those on this side of the chamber when in government did anything or proposed anything to boost small business, it was vehemently opposed at every single opportunity.

    But I guess what's even more important for those everyday Australians that are looking to what happens in this place—at what this place and the other place are doing to address cost-of-living pressures—is what is impacting them: the ability to put groceries on the table; to afford to pay power bills; to, currently, warm their houses; and, very, very soon, to cool their houses as we go into summer. What topics around that were talked about at the jobs and skills talkfest? None. But easing workforce shortages would make a significant contribution to easing cost-of-living pressures. We know this because cost-of-living pressures are significantly impacted at the moment due to supply chain issues. It's the supply chain that is being so dramatically impacted. There are increased costs of fuel. We know that the war in Ukraine is having impacts, which is something that we completely understand but those opposite, when in opposition, denied was any factor whatsoever.

    But we do know the supply chain is having a significant impact on cost-of-living pressures. How do we start to make practical inroads into supply chain issues? We boost the workforce. We need to do that today. We need to do that as soon as possible. As I said, there is a willing and able workforce ready to go. They are ready to do an extra shift or an extra day to help the small businesses that so many Australians—41 per cent of Australians—are employed in. They are available to go today.

    So I commend Senator Dean Smith's bill. We will continue to support it and make sure that these sorts of solutions—practical solutions—can be enacted quickly to make a real difference to help everyday Australian families, whether by putting more money in their pockets or by helping to ease the workplace shortages, and to make sure that we are supporting everyday Australians.

    As someone who sat on the community affairs committee in the last term of parliament, what I find extraordinary is the volume of inquiries we conducted. Because we understand the importance of looking at all legislative options, we understood the importance of making sure inquiries were held that would look at what solutions may be on the table. I would suggest that more good ideas come from this side of the chamber, particularly when it comes to helping small businesses and particularly when it comes to helping working families. But we held many, many inquiries. The fact is that those opposite, in these first hundred days of parliament, have gone out of their way to block an inquiry, to block looking at this as a solution.

    This is a government that held themselves up as the soon-to-be bastions of transparency. They wanted to make sure there was a new politics, that there was an open exchange of ideas, that there was transparency in what they were going to put forward in a legislative agenda that is going to have a direct impact not only on disability support pensioners and not only on age pensioners but on all of those small businesses that employ 41 per cent of Australians as well as the larger businesses that employ many more Australians who are able to then contribute more without having their pension impacted. So, what do those opposite do? They block an inquiry. They say, 'No, no, no; we don't want to look at this.' Is that because the unions told them not to? Is it because they can't look at any idea that's not their own? Is it because they don't care about cost-of-living pressures? We're yet to hear a word come out of the mouths of so many of those opposite as to what they plan to do. They've a plan for a plan—a secret plan to fight inflation that's allegedly rumbling around. But there is no plan to ease cost-of-living pressures.

    Those opposite spruiked I think around 94 times in the lead-up to the election that $275 was going to come off every Australian's power bill. Well, try to get them to say '$275' now. Not one of those opposite will mention the figure, because, as Australians are seeing, day after day, quarter after quarter, their power bills are continuing to rise. So, those opposite, who promised that Australians would be better off—how are they going to be better off? They're certainly not going to be $275 better off on their power bills. They're certainly not going to be better off when you object to moving towards allowing pensioners to increase their activity, increase their work, increase their hours, increase their productivity, increase the contribution that they can make to our economy. But when you refuse to look at that, when you refuse to inquire into it and to look at any ideas that aren't your own, you are standing in the way of improving the life of everyday Australians. You are standing in the way of easing cost-of-living pressures.

    All those opposite are interested in is making sure that John Setka gets his payback for the ABCC, making sure that we're going to see increased costs on building sites and increased costs to everyday Australians who are trying to build their own homes. Building their own homes is going to become more difficult, because all of a sudden the building commission won't be there anymore. We're going to see union thuggery return—not that it ever left, but we actually had the ABCC, which could look into union thuggery. But we're going to get rid of that. We're going to see workplaces and building sites become particularly unsafe, especially for women. We know how many cases were brought to the ABCC, and every one of those cases meant additional costs to people building a home and to businesses developing property. All of that, those cost-of-living pressures, are just going to increase, at a time when we have housing issues, when we need to be working towards getting more stock into the market. But that's not going to happen, because the union mates have to be appeased.

    We on this side are committed to ensuring that pensioners, disability support pensioners, are able to participate more fully, that they're able to boost their income, that they are able to continue to contribute to Australia's productivity and that small businesses are able to staff their businesses, so that restaurants are able to do both a lunch and a dinner service because they can actually get staff to work. These are the real impacts that are being felt. Retail businesses are not able to get someone to work. Aged-care homes that could be desperately keeping nurses and other aged-care workers in the workforce aren't able to bring them back just for one extra shift a week, because, at the moment, the reduction to their pension they would receive would have such an impact on their income that they are unable to do it. This is a simple solution. It is a fantastic bill that has been put forward by Senator Smith.

    Debate interrupted.