|
senate vote 2014-03-05#1
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-06-27 14:26:41
|
Title
Bills — Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2013; in Committee- Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2013 - In Committee - Keep schedule 1 unchanged
Description
<p class="speaker">Mark Furner</p><p>The question now is that the bill stand as printed.</p> <p class="speaker">Mitch Fifield</p>- The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2014-03-05.56.1 motion] that schedule 1 stand as printed.[1] In other words, the majority wanted the schedule to remain unchanged.
- The motion was put in response to a Green amendment that "Schedule 1, page 4 (line 1) to page 8 (line 9), ... be opposed".
- Because the majority wanted the schedule to remain unchanged, this Greens amendment was rejected.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5149 bill] was introduced to make a number of key changes. These include:
- * amending the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/ngra2012225/ National Gambling Reform Act 2012] to implement parts of the Government’s responsible gambling policy;
- * amending the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ssa1999338/ Social Security (Administration) Act 1999] so that the income management aspect of the [http://www.datsima.qld.gov.au/datsima/aboriginal-torres-strait-islander/government/programs-and-initiatives/cape-york-welfare-reform Cape York Welfare Reform] initiative can continue for a further two years;
- * amending the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/antsaa1999357/ A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999] and the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/antsaa1999509/ A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999] so that [http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/family-tax-benefit-part-a-part-b Family Tax Benefit Part A] can only be paid up to the end of the calendar year in which a teenager is completing senior secondary school.[2]
- There are several other measures introduced by this bill that can be explored in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1314a/14bd029 bills digest].
- Most of the measures are savings measures that had been announced by the previous Labor Government in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Australian_federal_budget 2013–14 Budget], the [http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/ 2012–13 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook] (MYEFO) or the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Australian_federal_budget 2012–13 Budget]. However, the gambling reform measures, the Cape York Welfare Reform measures and the changes to Paid Parental Leave arrangements[3] are newly proposed by the current Government.
- ''References''
- * [1] The wording of schedule 1 is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5149 here] under the heading "Text of bill".
- * [2] Read more about these measures in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1314a/14bd029 bills digest].
- * [3] Read about the changes to Paid Parental Leave arrangements in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1314a/14bd029 bills digest].
<p>I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to be moved to this bill and—by leave—move amendments as circulated in the name of the government on sheet BM461 together:</p><p class="italic">(1) Title, page 1 (line 13), omit ", charities".</p><p class="italic">(2) Clause 2, page 2 (table items 2 and 3), omit the table items, substitute:</p><p class="italic">(3) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 4), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(4) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 5), omit the table item, substitute:</p><p class="italic">(5) Schedule 1A, page 9 (lines 1 to 5), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(6) Schedule 3, item 36, page 15 (line 25), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(7) Schedule 3, item 36, page 16 (line 2), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(8) Schedule 3, item 36, page 16 (line 6), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(9) Schedule 3, item 36, page 16 (lines 9 and 10), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(10) Schedule 3, item 36, page 16 (line 15), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(11) Schedule 3, item 36, page 16 (line 21), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 May 2014".</p><p class="italic">(12) Schedule 4, item 6, page 17 (line 23), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(13) Schedule 4, item 6, page 17 (line 24), omit "<i>1</i><i>January 2014</i>", substitute "<i>1</i><i>July 2014</i>".</p><p class="italic">(14) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 1), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(15) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 4), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(16) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 8), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(17) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 27), omit "<i>1</i><i>January 2014</i>", substitute "<i>1</i><i>July 2014</i>".</p><p class="italic">(18) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 29), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(19) Schedule 4, item 6, page 18 (line 33), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(20) Schedule 4, item 6, page 19 (line 11), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(21) Schedule 4, item 14, page 20 (line 12), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(22) Schedule 4, item 14, page 20 (line 14), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(23) Schedule 4, item 14, page 20 (line 17), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(24) Schedule 4, item 14, page 20 (line 21), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(25) Schedule 4, item 14, page 21 (line 11), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(26) Schedule 4, item 14, page 21 (line 16), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(27) Schedule 4, item 14, page 21 (line 31), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(28) Schedule 4, item 14, page 22 (line 1), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(29) Schedule 4, item 14, page 22 (line 4), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(30) Schedule 4, item 14, page 22 (line 13), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(31) Schedule 4, item 14, page 22 (line 16), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(32) Schedule 4, item 14, page 22 (line 20), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(33) Schedule 6, item 20, page 44 (line 7), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(34) Schedule 6, item 21, page 44 (line 23), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(35) Schedule 6, item 25, page 48 (line 11), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(36) Schedule 6, item 25, page 48 (line 27), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(37) Schedule 6, item 28, page 63 (line 7), omit "1 January 2014,".</p><p class="italic">(38) Schedule 6, item 29, page 63 (lines 8 to 11), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(39) Schedule 6, item 30, page 64 (line 5), omit "Note 1", substitute "Note".</p><p class="italic">(40) Schedule 6, item 30, page 64 (lines 9 and 10), omit note 2.</p><p class="italic">(41) Schedule 6, item 30, page 64 (line 34) to page 65 (line 9), section 1223ABG to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(42) Schedule 6, item 39, page 66 (line 25), after "subsection 1061ZVAB(3)", insert "of the 1991 Act".</p><p class="italic">(43) Schedule 6, item 67, page 76 (line 35), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(44) Schedule 6, item 67, page 77 (line 16), omit "1 January 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(45) Schedule 6, item 74, page 93 (lines 5 and 6), omit the note.</p><p class="italic">(46) Schedule 6, item 75, page 93 (lines 10 to 24), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(47) Schedule 8, item 1, page 111 (line 11), omit "1 March 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(48) Schedule 8, item 3, page 111 (lines 16 and 17), omit "1 March 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(49) Schedule 8, item 7, page 112 (line 12), omit "1 March 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p class="italic">(50) Schedule 8, item 9, page 112 (lines 17 and 18), omit "1 March 2014", substitute "1 July 2014".</p><p>But I do understand that clauses 5, 38, 41 and 46 will need to be put separately.</p><p>Question agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Stephen Parry</p><p>The question now is that schedule 1A and item 29, section 1223ABG in item 30, and item 75 of schedule 6 stand as printed.</p><p>Question negatived.</p><p>All of the government's proposals have been agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Jan McLucas</p><p>by leave—I move amendments (6) to (10) on sheet 7456:</p><p class="italic">(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 23 and 24), omit "in venues nationally".</p><p class="italic">(7) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (line 26), omit "in venues nationally".</p><p class="italic">(8) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (line 9), omit "in venues nationally".</p><p class="italic">(9) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (after line 15), after paragraph 20(2)(a), insert:</p><p class="italic">(aa) to ensure that a venue-based voluntary pre-commitment scheme operating in a State or Territory is capable of connecting to a State or Territory wide voluntary pre-commitment scheme that operates within the State or Territory; and</p><p class="italic">(10) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (lines 16 and 17), omit "this capability", substitute "these capabilities".</p><p>These amendments go to the question of responsible gambling. Labor in government worked very hard with the community to find a solution but, for various reasons, we were not able to get to the point where we found that solution. But we still strongly hold the view that problem gambling is a very real and a very serious issue in our country. For too many Australians gambling can be incredibly destructive. It affects over five million Australians including friends, families and employers of people with a gambling problem.</p><p>We commit to continue to engage with stakeholders to develop effective ways of addressing this very real issue. As a party we need to revisit this issue and determine the best way forward, together with stakeholders from right across the community—and that is what we will do. So today we are moving amendments that will ensure that venue based schemes have the capacity to connect to state-wide schemes.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>I indicate that the Greens will be supporting the amendments, particularly the substantive amendment—amendment 9—which is to ensure that a venue based voluntary precommitment scheme operating in a state or territory is capable of connecting to a state- or territory-wide voluntary precommitment scheme that operates within the state or territory. As my colleague Senator Di Natale indicated, we do not support this schedule because we see it as a significant step backwards in addressing this very significant scourge of problem gambling.</p><p>So we will not be supporting this schedule; however, we will be supporting this amendment. We understand that the opposition, with this amendment, will be supporting this schedule. We are indicating that we support this amendment but we will still be opposing this schedule because we do not believe this amendment significantly alters or improves the schedule enough for us to support it; but we do think it is a slight improvement, if it goes ahead, and I understand that it is. I hope that makes our position clear.</p> <p class="speaker">Nick Xenophon</p><p>Can I just get some clarification. For similar reasons to Senator Siewert, I have real concerns about this. Has the government considered, in moving to a voluntary precommitment approach, that the independent research indicates that it does not work? And there is not even a semblance of requiring that machines be mandatory precommitment ready, which was previously the case in the former government's 2012 bill. So I just do not understand the basis on which they can reasonably and credibly say that voluntary precommitment will in any way work to deal with problem gamblers, particularly given the studies we have seen out of Nova Scotia and other jurisdictions that voluntary precommitment does not work.</p> <p class="speaker">Mitch Fifield</p><p>I am advised that there has not been testing of efficacy of arrangements. There may have been in relation to the technical capacity to deliver arrangements but, in relation to comparing efficacy of voluntary versus mandatory, there has not been.</p> <p class="speaker">Nick Xenophon</p><p>There you have it: no consideration given to the efficacy of whether it is voluntary or mandatory—efficacy as to how it will help problem gamblers. Honestly, that is absolutely reckless on the part of the government: no consideration given to the effectiveness of swinging towards a voluntary precommitment approach. Consideration being given to even having machines be mandatory precommitment ready might in some way have moderated the behaviour of some venues or the industry as a whole to know that that was something, like the Sword of Damocles, that could fall on them. The fact that there has been no consideration of the efficacy of these measures is truly quite shocking.</p><p>Question agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Jan McLucas</p><p>I move opposition amendment (12), opposing schedule 5:</p><p class="italic">(12) Schedule 5, page 23 (line 1) to page 38 (line 10), to be opposed.</p><p>This goes to interest charges to be applied to certain welfare debts. This measure from the government proposes to introduce interest charges on certain welfare debts. This includes debts incurred by people on Austudy, Youth Allowance and Abstudy.</p><p>Unfortunately, this government has already demonstrated its attitude to students. Frankly, it cannot be trusted on education. The students who will be affected by this measure are already on income support. Many of them are doing it tough. People on these welfare payments are already vulnerable. They do not need further punishment from a government that is already messing with their education for political purposes.</p><p>The government claims that the interest charges will encourage debtors to repay their debts in a timely fashion, but in reality it will do the opposite. By implementing interest charges on these debts the government is actually making it harder for people to repay those debts and making it harder for them to make ends meet.</p><p>Unfortunately, this government is treating students like political playthings. We have seen this with their approach to schools funding and now we are seeing it with this measure to hurt students by imposing further interest charges on low-income students. So Labor will not support the government's reform.</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: The question is that schedule 5 stand as printed.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>Can I seek clarification. The Greens are opposing this schedule on the grounds that Senator McLucas just outlined. We think this is an appalling approach towards students, and it is revenue raising from students. I would have thought that we are supporting the amendment and therefore are not supporting the schedule as printed?</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: I will call Senator McLucas to confirm the position of the opposition. You are opposing schedule 5?</p> <p class="speaker">Jan McLucas</p><p>That is correct.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>Thank you. I just needed to seek that clarification. The Greens do oppose this schedule. I made that clear when I gave my second reading contribution last year. I have a similar amendment that has been circulated, and it opposes this schedule. Obviously, if this amendment is dealt with now I will not need to move my amendment. But I want to be really clear that we oppose this measure—we will be voting to oppose this measure and supporting the amendment Senator McLucas just moved.</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: The question is that schedule 5 stand as printed.</p><p>Question negatived.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|