|
senate vote 2020-12-09#21
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2020-12-18 12:19:16
|
Title
Bills — Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020; in Committee- Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 - in Committee - Items (3) and (4) of schedule 1
Description
<p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>The government opposes items 3 and 4 in schedule 1 in the following terms:</p><p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, items 3 and 4, page 3 (lines 8 to 19), TO BE OPPOSED.</p>- The majority voted against keeping items (3) and (4) of schedule 1 unchanged. This division occurred after SA Senator [Anne Ruston](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/anne_ruston) (Liberal) [proposed](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-12-09.205.2) that they be opposed. According to the [explanatory memorandum](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fems%2Fr6608_ems_6895e3dd-ac55-4b5d-87ee-8a57f8c74b10%22;rec=0), removing these two items will "*ensure the disengaged youth and long-term welfare payment recipient Income Management measures continue to operate in the Northern Territory.*"
- ### More about the bill
- The [bill was introduced](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2021a/21bd033) "*to establish the [Cashless Debit Card](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cashless_Welfare_Card) (CDC) as an ongoing program rather than a time-limited trial*". The CDC program is controversial for many reasons, not least the [limited evidence](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-16/little-data-cashless-debit-card-effective-unisa-researcher-says/12887258) that it is benefiting the communities where it is currently in operation.
- Read more about the program and what the bill does in the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2021a/21bd033).
<p class="speaker">Amanda Stoker</p><p>Senator Lambie on a point of order?</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>I'd actually like to know what the amendments are about.</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIR: The minister is going to speak to that.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>This amendment seeks to make the transition from the income management scheme in the Northern Territory, from the BasicsCard to the cashless debit card, a voluntary scheme. It will allow those people who are currently on the BasicsCard in the Northern Territory who wish to transition to the cashless debit card to do so as a voluntary scheme. If they choose to remain on the BasicsCard they will also be able to do that.</p><p>The reason that the government has chosen to proceed with this is because we believe that when people in the Northern Territory are given the option of the advanced technology that is provided by the cashless debit card that they will actually choose to take up this technology. In a sign of commitment to this and the belief that this technology has improved, we are happy for the people—</p><p>Honourable senators interjecting—</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIR: I'm sorry, Minister, please resume your seat. If I can't hear the minister then I'm sure others can't as well. Can we have some order, please?</p><p>We firmly believe that the cashless debit card will enable participants to have the opportunity to choose the enhanced functionality and the increased flexibility that is offered by the cashless debit card. That is on the basis that currently the income management system of the BasicsCard allows participants to be able to transact at around only 16,000 terminals, whereas the cashless debit card provides them with the opportunity to make transactions at over 900,000 terminals around Australia. It enables them to use online purchasing. In fact, they can use their card wherever an EFTPOS terminal exists, and the only things that they will be restricted from being able to get access to when using this particular card will be alcohol, gambling products, some gift cards and cash.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>I rise to indicate that the opposition will not be supportive of the government's amendments on sheet TK264—which involve two parts, I think. I just want to take issue with one of the things the minister said, because she asserted that this would somehow make this all voluntary. Well, it won't. The amendment will effectively make it a Hobson's choice between a grey card and a green card. So Labor isn't supporting the government's amendment, because it isn't making income management voluntary. What it is doing is simply providing a choice of a different coloured piece of plastic. So, for the reasons that were well ventilated in the second reading debate, we do not support the government's amendments on TK264.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>On the BasicsCard itself, Minister, can you tell me—I believe that's got a runout date? Will it actually need to be revoted on, or does it have an end-of-life date? When is that?</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>The BasicsCard is an ongoing measure. It is legislated as an ongoing measure. It has an instrument, and I'm actually holding the existing instrument in my hand. I will just take the opportunity whilst I'm answering your question to say that I was a tiny bit disappointed at Senator Wong's accusation that somehow this is entirely a choice between a silver card and a green card, as if the government's going out there and saying, 'You can have a silver card or a green card.' I remind those in this place that there was a bipartisan approach to this and in fact the instrument that you're referring to, Senator Lambie, was actually signed by a member from the other place, Mrs Macklin, when she was the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and the Minister for Disability Reform. So, we would continue—this is the instrument as it relates to the Northern Territory—</p> <p class="speaker">Hon. Senators</p><p>Honourable senators interjecting—</p><p>The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Order! I can't hear the minister.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>I just wanted to put on the record that that was the instrument that was signed by Mrs Macklin back at that time.</p><p>Senator Lambie, the instrument has a 10-year life. It was signed in 2012. A disallowable instrument will be introduced into this place in 2022 at the expiry of that 10-year period for this place to vote on again. But the measure, of itself, is an ongoing measure.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>Let me get this right: does the cashless debit card itself include that it is on a two-year trial in the Northern Territory as well? Are you going to swap that straight over, and is it going to have an instrument? I know it's only got two years. So I'm asking you: if they move over to the cashless debit card in the Northern Territory, does that get two years as well? If that's the case, I'm going to encourage them to get over to it now, because it's not going to survive after the two years. That's what I want to know.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>The same situation exists whether it be the BasicsCard or the cashless debit card. We haven't actually moved the amendment as yet in relation to the two-year time limit on the cashless debit card. That is the next amendment. But, for the purposes of effect, the cashless debit card or the BasicsCard will still be affected by the same instrument as I just described, which is a disallowable instrument that will be brought into this place in 2022.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>So let me get this right: the CDC is ongoing in the Northern Territory, but it's on trial everywhere else in the country—correct? So, in those trial sites, it'll be on trial for a further two years but, in the Northern Territory, the CDC will be ongoing?</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Senator Lambie, the CDC extension that we're seeking to bring into effect by this legislation today, subject, obviously, to the passage of the amendment that's coming up next, will be a two-year measure. If, at the end of that two years, the decision is not to continue with the cashless debit card, the people in the Northern Territory will remain on income management because it's an ongoing measure, unless this parliament chooses at that time to disallow the instrument. In disallowing the instrument, obviously there would be other impacts of that.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>What happens if the BasicsCard instrument is disallowed?</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Senator Lambie, the measure would expire.</p> <p class="speaker">Jacqui Lambie</p><p>If that happens, does that mean no cashless debit card?</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Senator Lambie, as I explained earlier, the extension to the cashless debit card that we're seeking to make with the next amendment that will be put before the chamber is for a two-year extension on the cashless debit card. Income management, as it exists in the Northern Territory, has a number of measures that are contained within the instrument that currently oversees or encompasses income management. This instrument to which you refer applies to some of them. Some of the other measures are actually not encompassed by this particular measure. The ongoing measure of income management in the Northern Territory is subject to other legislation. What we are seeking to do today is to give the people in the Northern Territory the opportunity to be able to use a different technology. The income management that they are operating under remains the same. It's just that they will be able to use a different technology. It doesn't actually change the income management. Everything that applies to the existing BasicsCard income management legislation remains in place, as it was yesterday.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>So let's be clear here. The government just won the second reading vote here because Centre Alliance didn't turn up. I'm naming it. Centre Alliance did not turn up for the vote, folks. For those people listening to this debate—and I know there are many of them—we could have ended this five minutes ago with that vote. Centre Alliance didn't even have the guts to come in here and vote with the government; they just did not turn up. So why is the government circulating these amendments? It is because you've done a deal with Centre Alliance, haven't you? That's because you know that you won't win on the third vote unless you make these amendments—which, make no mistake, keep the cashless debit card running. All those people listening tonight, thinking they were going to be off this card because Centre Alliance had said they didn't support it, are now hugely disappointed. And the person who made that decision didn't even have the guts to turn up here and face this Senate. So why, Minister, are you moving these amendments? Please name it.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Before I respond to Senator Siewert's question, I also table the two supplementary explanatory memoranda relating to the amendments that I'm currently in the process of moving. Senator Siewert, I acknowledge your position on this measure and I respect your position on this measure. The reason the government has sought to move these two amendments, I would have thought was fairly obvious. We absolutely stand by the belief that the people of the Northern Territory, when given the choice as to whether to change the technology—and that really all it is, Senator Siewert, and I think you acknowledge it is nothing more than a change in the technology—will see the benefit. I can tell you from firsthand experience: I spent a number of days in the Northern Territory earlier this year and I went out to communities and I spoke to a lot of people who were on the BasicsCard. I sat with them and I explained to them the differences between the BasicsCard and the CDC, and almost without exception the people I was speaking to said, 'I would rather have the CDC than the BasicsCard.' This is not a debate about whether you have income management or not. It is merely a technology upgrade, and that is what this measure seeks to do, Senator Siewert.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>The people of the Northern Territory were very clear. This morning, in my contribution to the second reading debate, I read out a letter that had been sent to Senator Patrick and the crossbenchers. That letter made it very clear that Aboriginal organisations, who represent thousands of Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, did not support the cashless debit card. They don't support compulsory income management. In fact, some organisations in the Northern Territory that originally supported compulsory income management have changed their position. Why are you not only bringing government amendments that change the conversion to the cashless debit card in the Northern Territory to a voluntary position but also—and I've got to say, of course, I voted to get rid of the cashless debit card with that vote on permanency—suddenly changing your mind about permanency? Name it up.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>In relation to your comments around the amendment before the chair—the Northern Territory voluntary opportunity to move from the BasicsCard to the cashless debit card—I want to be really clear. The amendment that is before the chair is for the opportunity for people in the Northern Territory who are currently on the BasicsCard to move to the CDC. It is nothing more and nothing less than that. In relation to the two-year time frame that we've put on the extension of the existing sites—or with all of the CDC technology, the four existing trial sites, as well as Cape York—I think there have been a lot of contributions in this place, where people have expressed extreme disappointment that there is not strong empirical data, that there's not quantitative data. Much of the data that we have is qualitative, and some of it is even anecdotal. That's why I spent the time going out and actually speaking to people in communities and asking them what they thought.</p> <p class="speaker">Lidia Thorpe</p><p>Who'd you talk to? Name them.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>I did name some of them; I'll take that interjection. In fact, if the senator would like to refer back to my second reading speech, I actually named a number of people who've written to me today from communities asking me for the continuation of the cashless debit card.</p> <p class="speaker">Lidia Thorpe</p><p>Name them.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>I did name them in my second reading speech, Senator Thorpe, and you're welcome to look at that. As I said, I acknowledge we do not have the kind of strong data—and I was frustrated, as you are, that we don't have the kind of data. I do have very strong data that you would refer to as qualitative. For that reason, the government has listened to what has been said in this chamber, and we said, okay, during the next two years—</p><p class="italic">Senator Siewert interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Amanda Stoker</p><p>Order, Senator Siewert, please!</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Senator Siewert, we will continue with the existing scheme, and during that time we will put in place an evaluation process. I'll give the commitment to this chamber that the evaluation process and the outcomes of that will be released prior to any decision being requested. If this government happens to be here when the time expires that will be released before the legislation is brought to this chamber.</p> <p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>Have you done a deal with Centre Alliance on this bill? And, if so, what is it?</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|