Mr SWAN (2:20 PM) —My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Community Services. Minister, isn't it the case that a family still faces a substantial family tax debt even if they immediately advise Centrelink of their changed earnings and that, indeed, they can actually accumulate a debt even if their income estimate falls? Minister, isn't it the case that the Cooper family from Toorbul in Queensland were told that they would receive a debt of $1,300, even though their income estimate fell by $4,500 when they swapped parenting roles? Minister, with families who do the right thing still being slugged with debts, isn't your GST inspired family tax system a debt trap?

Mr ANTHONY (Minister for Community Services) —Of course, I can never take the word of the example that the member for Lilley has given me because his modus operandi is not to come up with any policies—because they do not have a families policy—but to come up with any tactics that are going to scare the over 2.2 million Australians who have received substantially more family tax payments. One of the issues that he is going to, I suspect, is the issue with family tax benefit part B. This is in regard to some of the administration methods. The whole premise we have is that families are getting more assistance, but we do require them to give their accurate estimates. As far as family tax benefit part B is concerned, 1.2 million Australians have received that. It partly compensates for having only one tax-free threshold. It replaces six complicated forms of assistance. FTB part B provides more assistance and has more generous income testing arrangements.

Households will always be better off financially, of course, if that second earner starts to go to work and a household has the benefit of additional income earned as well as the benefit of two income-free thresholds. The whole premise of FTB part B was to give families choice. If one member of the family, whether male or female, wishes to stay at home, then of course we would reward them through increased family tax payments, particularly for children under the age of five; or, if both parents decide to work, then both parents take advantage of the two tax-free thresholds.

You supported this legislation—the Labor Party supported this legislation, as well as the reduction of payments. I would just like to quote the shadow minister for family services and aged care back in June 1999:

What are you on about, Member for Lilley? You supported this legislation which increased payments quite considerably. And of course we do expect families to give their correct estimates. That is why 880,000 families have changed their estimates over the last 12 months to ensure that their estimates are correct.