Anthony Albanese’s government has declined to implement one of the findings of the robodebt royal commission, in a move a Greens senator has dubbed “perplexing”.
The Greens had sought to tack on one of the royal commission recommendations to a government welfare bill that’s being debated in the Senate this week, but Labor voted against the amendment on Wednesday.
“It’s really disappointing, and it’s perplexing,” Greens Senator Janet Rice told Crikey.
The amendment would have reinstated a six-year limit on debt recovery for social security debt, which was one of the 57 recommendations made by the royal commission when its final report was released in July.
When then-social services minister Christian Porter and then-human services minister Alan Tudge originally announced in March 2016 the limit would be removed, they said it was in order to “provide long-needed incentives for people to repay their debt to the Commonwealth taxpayer”.
“If people have received social security, family assistance, paid parental leave or student payments that they are not entitled to, then their debts should be recovered wherever reasonable and possible,” Porter said in a press release at the time.
Royal commissioner Catherine Holmes wrote in her report there was “no obvious reason” for the move.
“It seemed to stem from the government’s broader approach to social security recipients,” she wrote.
“To the contrary, as a cohort more likely to be in financial difficulty, there is every reason not to pursue ancient debts against them.”
Holmes recommended reinstating an effective limitation period of six years for the government to bring proceedings to recover debts under the Social Security Act.
“There is no reason that current and former social security recipients should be on any different footing from other debtors,” she added.
The government is currently undertaking to amend the Social Security Act in order to increase JobSeeker payments and expand access to welfare for single parents and people aged over 55, among other changes.
The bill, called “Strengthening the Security Net”, has passed the lower house and is likely to pass the Senate too, after the Greens vowed to support it.
Labor Senator Tim Ayres told the Senate on Wednesday the government would not be “rushed into” implementing individual robodebt recommendations before considering a wholesale response to the report.
“We will consider all of the recommendations of the robodebt royal commission,” he said. “We will develop, as a government, a careful package of reforms.”
Liberal Senator Anne Ruston said the opposition would vote against it too.
“We don’t believe this is the appropriate place to deal with such an amendment,” she said.
Rice said her party colleagues were hopeful to get some of their amendments passed, but that they would support the bill regardless.
“It will be the will of the Senate, that it wants people on income support to be able to earn more — and it’s up to the government as to whether they accept that,” she told Crikey.
So now the question is did they vote against it purely because the Greens were the one who put the amendment there, or did they vote against it because Labor are Liberal-lite and actually do oppose it? Either way is pathetic, just a slightly different flavour of pathetic.
Both reasons IMHO, and more so because Labor have proved themselves ineffective in all areas of meaningful reform. I wasted my vote.
So – a vote for the Greens, Nats, Libs, PHON would have brought a different result? Ya dreamin’
I think we’ve all been dudded. When I voted, I hoped we were getting a Whitlamesque Lion, but all we got was a Turnbullesque Mouse. Did you see Albanese’s son was just given access by Joyce to the Qantas Chairman’s Lounge, only a week or so after Albanese blocked extra flight slots to Qatar and Turkish Airlines?
One could argue that many in parliament are effectively social security recipients.
And then leaning for life with those solid gold pensions, perks and free rail travel.
Once attached, remora-like to the Treasury teat, it is champagne, caviar & no regrets for the rest of their worthless existences.
At the expense of those who do the real work – the tax payers, involuntary unlike their maaates.
Since Latham those previous gold pensions have gone. They are entitled to superannuation payments but cannot draw them before the age of 60. It’s one reason #30 keeps hanging around – unemployable elsewhere so no other source of income if he quits the seat of Cook.
That only applies to those MPs who got onto the gravy train and noses firmly in the trough after he scared the bejazus out of the Rodent, ca. 2003/4.
The lifer space wasters, seat polishers & sundry oxygen thieves of the Duopoly previously ensconced still have the all the CSS+ entitlements.
Labor risks putting itself into a death spiral. Its lukewarm approach to environmental and social justice matters this term means it is almost certain to lose votes to the Greens next election. The only way to recoup these numbers is to poach votes from the Liberals (or maybe the Teals). The only way they can do this is by leaning further to the right and presenting even more than they do now as LNP-lite. Which will lose them more votes to the Greens. Etc, etc, etc, and so on down the chute.
About fn time. You know Hawke was a CIA informant, right? Labor hasn’t been worth a damn since everyone stood by during the Whitlam coup.
Having read Anton Nilsson’s article, above, about the LNP and the Greens wanting the same outcome but voting against each other’s amendments I am as unlikely to vote for the Greens as the LNP. (I have voted Greens before and have regard for the role of the ACT Greens in working with ACT ALP to form a government. But federally? less likely with every passing parliamentary sitting. I have never contemplated voting LNP at any level.)
The Greens voted against the Coalition’s amendment because it mandated a drop in JobSeeker.
Disagree, think it reflects some deep seated shared culture amongst many above median age voters, that Howard, Crosby et al. identified, to pare off ageing Labor voters &/or ‘persuadables’ on sociocultural issues, inc. astroturfing of eugenics with media complicity.
May take a few more years to shake off….
“Labor joins with the Liberals in hounding welfare recipients to their graves.”
Lets hope so
As many good readers would remember, Labor has supported a number of nasty security bills in the past so this should hardly come as a surprise. Labor loves a bit of secrecy, so I wouldn’t even give them the credit of voting this way because of their obsessive hatred of the Greens.