Mr ENTSCH(8.53 p.m.) —Madam Deputy Speaker, I also would like to take this opportunity—the first one that I have had—to congratulate you on your elevation to such an esteemed position. I am sure that you will perform your role as Deputy Speaker proudly. Congratulations.

I rise this evening to lend my strong support to the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Parenting and Other Measures) Bill 1997 . The various measures introduced by this bill will fix five main problem areas which have been identified in the legislation as it now stands. These problems are as follows: firstly, there are unnecessary paperwork requirements for recipients whose marital status changes but not the circumstances which make them deserving of support; secondly, there is a requirement for parents to wait too long a period before being permitted to claim arrears of child disability allowance; thirdly, inconsistent hardship rules are applied to ordinary waiting periods and the income maintenance periods; fourthly, some people are abusing the assessment system for health care card eligibility by making their income appear lower for the short four-week period in which they are means tested; and, fifthly, there are unnecessary and burdensome costs to the taxpayer and wastage of this parliament's time by necessitating changes to be made to the data matching legislation every time a new social security payment is introduced.

I will focus my remarks this evening on only some of the measures implemented through this bill: the introduction of the parenting payment; the changes to the child disability allowance, and maintaining the eligibility to the health care card for those soon to be excluded from the child disability allowance; and making the welfare system less open to abuse by welfare cheats.

The government intends to remove the unnecessary paperwork requirements for recipients whose marital status changes, but not their need for assistance, by introducing the parenting payment from 20 March 1998. It will be available to married and non-married parents alike whose low income levels require them to rely on the state. It will simplify the administrative arrangements in much the same way as other new measures, like the youth allowance, by reducing the number of possible programs open to parents who need our support. In the place of the parenting allowance and the sole parents pension there will be created one simple and non-discriminatory system.

Parenting for people with low incomes is difficult enough without being burdened with the requirement to change from one discriminatory system to another, as was the requirement under the Labor Party. If the social stigma of needing to rely on the government for assistance in rearing children in times of crisis is not enough, the Labor Party would have the struggling parents who are not married tagged with the additional `sole parent' label—an identifier which I believe is totally unnecessary.

I am particularly pleased with the increase in the number of days of leave that carers can now access—up from 42 to 63 days—without having their payments reduced or terminated. This is just one aspect of the broader carer reform package which has done so much to help those who help others in our community. Considering the stressful, distressing and frequently physically exhausting nature of their work, carers could do with a little bit more time off. This is necessary just for them to recuperate and energise so that they can continue their work as carers more effectively for a much longer period. Without the threat of penalties, carers can concentrate more fully on their work.

I would like at this point to bring to the attention of the House a very special constituent in my electorate of Leichhardt: Mrs Jeanne Olufson, who is now aged 65, has been a carer for her father on a full-time basis for the last 12 years. While looking after her own father, she has also provided much support and assistance for her father-in-law, his wife and his brother. She provided support for her father-in-law, as his part-time carer, on and off for the last six years of his life. He passed away in 1989. Jeanne has been a full-time carer for the last 12 years, as I said earlier.

Jeanne's father, who is now 91, has been living with Jeanne and her husband since his arrival from England in 1986. In addition to many other difficulties associated with old age, Jeanne's father developed retention of urine earlier this year and had to have an in-dwelling catheter inserted. Jeanne was advised to apply for urinary drainage bags through the state Department of Community Health, and received a limited supply in June this year. She soon learned that there was a minimum waiting period of 12 weeks.

While waiting for bags to come through, Jeanne had to frequent the urology ward at the local hospital where she has been able to obtain only one week's supply. Very occasionally she has been lucky enough to get two weeks supply. Apparently the hospital itself is in short supply, and it is almost impossible to obtain more than one or two weeks supply at a time.

There have been instances when, out of desperation, Jeanne had to almost beg for bags. On very rare occasions some urinary drainage bags have been available through the Blue Nursing Service when they were no longer needed, and Jeanne was fortunate enough to receive these. Something as fundamental as urinary drainage bags should be available on demand. To force carers and patients to be rationed in such a way is simply outrageous and unacceptable.

At 91, Jeanne's father is really quite frail and needs Jeanne to help him with showering and dressing and, of course, he needs to have the drainage bags emptied and changed regularly. He is totally dependent on her. She also takes him to hospital for regular check-ups every month to have his catheter changed.

Sadly, Jeanne's dad is also totally incontinent. He takes diuretic tablets on a daily basis to prevent heart failure. His clothing and linen need to be changed frequently, and he regularly depends on Jeanne—as he does in everything—to do this. The story with the catheter bags is often repeated with the incontinence pads. The waiting period is, again, 12 weeks, and Jeanne and her husband have to buy these pads themselves, at a cost of $76 for 48 pads. This is an enormous cost burden to them.

While young at heart, at 65 Jeanne is not what we would call a young person. Her health is also deteriorating. In June this year she had a serious heart condition and spent several weeks in hospital. In spite of her ill health, Jeanne is still totally committed to the cause of her dad. She is one of the many carers in my electorate who will benefit from the increased number of days of leave that carers will be able to access. Carers such as Jeanne sacrifice everything to take care of their loved ones. They do this out of pure love and do so in a selfless manner.  The duties of a carer are beyond the ordinary person. Carers take on jobs of enormous responsibility; jobs that most of us in the community would find daunting and very stressful to fulfil. Jeanne's dedication, selflessness and perseverance have made life for others more comfortable and meaningful, and for that she deserves recognition. I take this opportunity to thank her and to commend her for her work.

It is people like Jeanne who actually reduce the burden of cost on our government by being prepared to do this work freely and with total commitment. Allowing a little bit more time for them to recharge their batteries—and 63 days, in reality, is not a long time, given the difficulty of the work they have to do—is certainly going some way to recognising the wonderful contribution they make to our community.

Changes made to the current system in this legislation relating to the child disability allowance are also a step forward. The notion of more reliable, simpler methods of assessing eligibility for child disability allowances are reasonable. I am pleased by the inclusion of the list of manifest and chronic medical conditions which will enable families to fast-track access to the child disability allowance. This ensures that those in most need of our support receive it first and foremost.

The measures introduced in this legislation with respect to the child disability allowance are generally very positive. It is particularly pleasing to know that the government recognises the sensitivities involved in the special needs of families which have a child or children with disabilities. I am sure those families that are already receiving the child disability allowance, and those which will be receiving it at the end of June 1988, will be relieved to know that they will continue to receive payments until 30 June 2003 without being subject to further medical reviews. Few families will mind reverting to the new assessment system at the end of this period.

Under this legislation, some children with minor disabilities will be excluded from eligibility for the child disability allowance. I was initially concerned on hearing that, but on further inspection I found that the type of disability that now entitles someone to the allowance includes some very mild medical problems like asthma—I must stress that I am talking about very mild cases, not chronic disabilities—conditions which are very manageable and cause little disruption to the sufferer's quality of life, given proper management.

With this in mind, I am pleased to point out that the new child disability allowance applicants who do not qualify for the benefit under the new table of assessments system, but who have a medical condition, will qualify for the health care card. This will assist in meeting the costs of medication, and will benefit families in my electorate.  This measure could easily be adopted in other areas too, particularly where it concerns people on low incomes, part-time workers, or self-funded retirees on very modest incomes who are not eligible for the health care card but who clearly, without a doubt, need one. I strongly urge our government to consider extending the benefits of the health care card to these needy citizens.

It would be a very small gesture, but one that would be greatly appreciated, particularly by people like the self-funded retirees who have made a commitment through their entire lives to look after themselves and their families into their retirement, at a time when it was not fashionable to do so. On reaching retirement, and having a very limited income, they are finding that things are extremely difficult to manage. I believe that this is one way, albeit small, of acknowledging their contribution and their responsible attitude to life, and rewarding them in a very small way for their attitude.

A measure introduced in this legislation also sees a reduction in the waiting period before parents can claim child disability allowance. This brings the child disability allowance into line with other social security payments. Some people have clearly been abusing the system of assessing health care card eligibility by making their income appear lower for the short four-week period in which they are means tested. This legislation doubles the income assessment period to make it harder for people to give the impression of having a lower income than they actually have.

While this government is not about shirking its responsibilities in relation to welfare, the community has responded very positively to the number of measures we have introduced to prevent people from taking advantage of the taxpayer. I think the previous speaker, the member for Canning (Mrs Johnston), made the comment that it is not the government that is creating wealth; it is the people who create wealth and it is governments that spend it. I think it is important that we acknowledge that the taxpayers are the ones who are losing out here. It is important that we make sure that the money that is contributed—in some cases overgenerously by some taxpayers—is spent appropriately in areas where it is really needed.

Unlike our predecessors, we will continue to crack down on welfare cheats. It is something that this government certainly has the courage to do. I hope that at the end of the day, with some of those taxpayer savings that we made, we will be in a far better position to be able to put some of that additional money back into the hands of people who really have absolutely no hope whatsoever of being able to raise money themselves—and I talk about the elderly, people who are both physically and mentally disabled, and carers. These are the areas where I believe we have to focus. Every dollar that we can save on people who are cheating the welfare system I believe is a dollar that we can put into the hands of those who are desperately in need of it. I very strongly endorse and support those measures.

In closing, let me say that this legislation is further proof that our government is capable of lateral thinking. We are not prepared to continue to offer bandaid solutions. We are a government that is looking to establish new and innovative ways of dealing with age-old problems and one that is finally starting to get its priorities right. It is going to go some way—and I stress `some way' as there is still a long way to go—towards identifying, supporting and rewarding the most needy in our society as well those who are without doubt the most worthy. I am confident that, with continued successful financial management, we will continue to grow and further develop these essential programs. I commend this bill to the House.