Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Monday, 21 November 2011
Page: 13129


Mr TEHAN (Wannon) (19:12): I commend the member for Makin for his efforts in trying for 10 minutes to justify the unjustifiable. It was a valiant effort. He tried to go around the subject matter as best he could, but I do not think anyone could say that in any way what the government has done here is just or is fair. The motion notes that in the 2011 budget, the Labor government announced the extension of the Exceptional Circumstances Exit Grants program as part of its drought assistance measures. Very good. Less than six weeks into the extended 52-week program, the government announced that funds had run out. The exit grant was often the only means by which some farmers could exit their farms with sufficient support to transition to a new livelihood. Many farmers who applied and were assessed as eligible for the grant proceeded to put their farms on the market and had sold their farms through exchange of contracts prior to the announcement that the funds had run out. Many of these farmers, on the basis of the exit grant support, have made financial commitments to buy alternative accommodation so they can transition to their new locality and employment. And many of these farmers who trusted the government's commitment and Centrelink's documentation approving their eligibility are now in dire financial straits with no capacity to borrow, no income and no opportunity to become re-established.

This motion calls on the government to do what they said they would do: provide the exit grant to the farmers that have sold their farms through exchange of contracts by 10 August 2011 and were eligible under the guidelines for the extra grant had funding not run out.

Mr Mitchell: Where haven't they done it?

Mr TEHAN: Okay, are you saying that the government is going to go to those 30 farmers who have come to you? Are you making a commitment on behalf of the government to provide these farmers with their money?

Mr Mitchell: You've got no idea .

Mr TEHAN: I have got plenty of idea, clear-cut, right here. You don't like hearing it.

Mr Mitchell interjecting

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. DGH Adams ): Order! The honourable member for McEwen should stay silent.

Mr TEHAN: Sometimes in this place the truth hurts. We hear from the member for McEwen about the truth hurting. We are concerned about what they are doing and how they are hurting these farmers. I could be very unkind and say it is because the financial management of this government beggars belief. Their incompetence and waste has led to them pulling the funds six weeks into a 52-week program and leaving these farmers high and dry. That is not good enough. We have this motion today because we want the government to act.

I commend the federal member for Murray for putting this motion forward and for representing her constituents in the way that she has. She has not lain down. She has presented the facts. She has moved this motion. If the member for McEwen wants to know who the farmers are who are impacted, we have the list right here.

The best thing the member for McEwen could do is say to the Prime Minister in his party room tomorrow: 'What we did to these farmers was unjust. We led them down a path that made them think they would be eligible for the next year for exit grants.' No-one wants these farmers to exit their land but, given 10 years of drought, sadly, it was the only option left to them.

I call on the government to support this motion. I commend the federal member for Murray for bringing it to this committee. The member for McEwen should, rather than shake his head, get in his party room and say, 'What we did was wrong,' and defend these farmers.