Download Fragment

Tuesday, 23 August 2011
Page: 5166

Senator NASH (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (13:11): Given that, it might be an appropriate time to put this in a little context. I do have a number of questions but some context at this point might be useful as we have not had this legislation before us in the chamber for some time. The government is putting forward a change in the maximum per child rebate to $7,500 per annum. In essence that is what it does, and it also completely cuts out the indexation for several years. The reason I raise this before I move to my questions is that it is important that we look at exactly what this piece of legislation does and exactly what the current arrangements would be if the standing arrangements had been in place. It would have been $8,179 per annum and we are now looking to reduce that under this legislation to $7,500. When, as the minister has just indicated, the primary purpose of this legislation is savings, many out there in the community would be very concerned that child care is being used as a cash cow for the government.

The minister referred to the figure of $81 million in savings. It is interesting that this government has spent $80.9 million on an emissions trading scheme that does not even exist. He we are on one hand looking at government waste of around $81 million and yet working families out in our communities, and particularly regional families, are going to have to wear a savings measure of almost exactly the same figure. That would raise the question for those out in the community: why are working families having to bear the brunt of this when the government has already wasted $81 million on something like administering the emissions trading scheme that does not even exist? This government needs to answer a lot of questions about why child care is being used as a cash cow—why the savings have to be generated from this area. I ask the minister at this point why it was deemed appropriate that the child care rebate be used to raise funds for a government with a debt of $198 billion.