Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 1:50:02 to 1:58:37
A heated debate occurs regarding proposed amendments to the PHI rebate bill, specifically concerning a carve-out for age pensioners and the government's approach to legislative negotiations.
Topics: Health, Social services
Speakers: Senator Anne Ruston, Senator Nita Green, Blair Comley, Unknown Speaker, Celia Street, Paul McBride
>> Okay. Sorry that's where I've got Australia bit we left out. Sorry. >> Okay. Fine. Fantastic. Okay. So um I'm just keen to understand in terms of there's been um debate around uh this reintroduction of the bill that got discharged um uh around um a carve out for age pensioners. >> Yes. So I'm keen to understand um how um how regularly um is the age pension eligibility assessed by services Australia when in in to your >> testing my knowledge but my recollection is services Australia do an assessment of age care eligibility so part rate max rate and what you get on a fortnightly basis for age pensioners.
It would be then be a question of how that assessment and how that data could
>> so so at the moment sorry you go
>> so I think we might have misunderstood your question because at the moment the pensioner status doesn't
>> No no no I know it doesn't I do know that [laughter]
>> in fact I think misunderstood your
question >> no I know so I understand and I'm sorry I thought you paid it >> services Australia administered this on behalf of the department yes so I get So the person for all intents and purposes doesn't have any interaction with services Australia. They're just doing your background technology work for you in terms of the claims process. Get that? >> If there was to be a change that carved out pensioners in relation to the over 65 rebate, I'm just keen to understand
>> So I was going to say there's there's a number of different ways that could occur. It could happen through the the ATO. It could happen through services
Australia. Why would a pensioner necessarily interact with the ATO?
you're right. Full pensioners wouldn't.
>> Well, we know that 700,000 of the people that have likely to be impacted by this are full pensioners. So, there's 700,000.
>> Correct. I'm trying to give you a full
picture.
>> But the question we've asked services Australia um is to provide us details of
kind of how this would work within a kind of system kind of perspective noting that um they don't have details carve out it could look like a solution that would need a kind of broader kind of interaction with Service Australia's payment systems.
>> Okay. I think so generally here though Senator we are sort of speculating on a hypothetical of what is not actually government policy about how it may be administered for a policy we don't actually know what it is
>> I'm going to ask you a question then on the back of what you've just said um if if there is a decision taken by government that they're going to accept a um the the amendment that is before the parliament at the moment by the way it's not exactly hypothetical people. There is a amendment sitting in the House of Representatives chamber as we sit here right now. Um will there be a and a new um or updated impact analysis as it relates to this amendment?
>> Well, I suppose
>> if if if you if it is agreed to.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I I suppose there's a difference between saying in a process point is there likely be an impact analysis if a government's to make a decision compared with us speculating on what the potential future government policy might be. I'm just uncomfortable about doing that.
>> Okay.
>> Normal course of events we would do [clears throat] an impact analysis if there was a policy proposal by the government that's being considered and and and then put forward. But in terms of these questions about exactly how would you design and administer something for that's not government policy. I don't think that's really what we would normally do in estimates.
>> Okay. I suppose um yeah I'm just really concerned that in this particular policy area and it's not just this one that a lot of the stuff that is really important in terms of the information about the impact that the policy is likely to have more broadly have not been dealt with. So I'm just keen that if we bring this back and there is a decision to bring this back and make the changes that we are um in a situation and maybe it's to the minister if you don't want to answer it you know will the government give um this estimates hearing um a commitment that they will um do a a broad analysis of the impact of this potential change and as I say it's not a hypothetical it's sitting in the chamber down there right now will you give this this estimates a guarantee that you will be more wholesome um in terms of your analysis of the impacts of this um going forward instead of you know not having done it previously. Well, when I finished you're welcome to go for your life.
>> Thank thank you very much. [cough and clears throat] Um there's a couple of things in that. I mean firstly um we have reintroduced a bill um uh because unfortunately um the coalition and the greens teamed up so that we couldn't even have a debate on this bill in the Senate. Um uh there was an amendment on the original bill um that was discharged um that I think you are referring to. I don't think there's a current amendment in the house but whether there is or there isn't
>> I can guarantee you there is
>> the bill that was reintroduced is the government policy. Um I can talk to you about the parliamentary processes which is essentially if the government were to remove amendments or consider amendments. There are times where we would seek to provide um supplementary explanatory memorandums which we do quite often um or of course provide information during a committee debate in the Senate. We will of course do that. the government is absolutely entitled to consider amendments put forward by members of um uh the house or um the senate and respond to those um because we would like to have a pathway through the parliament for this legislation. I think though um I think we can be quite frank with each other. Senator Ruston, um I don't think it's your position that if there was a carve out or an amendment that you would vote for the bill anyway. Um, unless you've got a different position you'd like to let the Senate know about that you would change your position based on certain amendments. >> No, that's okay. So, that's a no. >> No. So, you're asking for information that we will or will won't provide, but it won't change the position of the coalition anyway. You've dealt yourselves out of this conversation. We will be um working with the other members of the parliament to try to pass this legislation.
>> Yeah. So I just point out that Senate estimates I get to ask you questions and Okay. Yeah. But you also don't get to put on the record what my position is when I when I excuse me when I remain silent that is not actually your opportunity to fill the space.
>> Are you asking me a question now?
>> Yeah. Which
>> is there a question? [clears throat]
>> I'm just explaining to you that you have just verbal me.
>> You don't need to explain anything to me. I understand how the bill I understand how estimates work. I understand the position of the coalition. I understand that you you voted with the Greens to discharge this bill and you've indicated that you won't support in any form. >> What we will seek to do is um uh work through the parliamentary processes in the same way that we always do to consider amendments put forward by other members of the um crossbench um uh to progress this bill because we do think it's important. We we think that um you know the change to ensure that all Australians based um pay get a rebate based on income and not age um so that we can fund more beds and more packages and better care is an important one to progress through the parliament. So that's what we'll do with or without the coalition support.
>> Pity you weren't here today cuz we found out that there weren't going to be any new beds. But um uh anyway, so could um could I just understand then um in terms of the monitoring in and enforcement at the moment the monitoring and enforcement according to what you've just answered is is undertaken through the reconciliation through the