

- Title
BILLS
Social Security Legislation Amendment (Family Participation Measures) Bill 2011
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
21-11-2011
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
43
- Electorate
- Interjector
- Page
8963
- Party
AG
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Stage
In Committee
- Type
- Context
BILLS
- System Id
chamber/hansards/4df8ca1e-91e8-412c-81fc-513013097de9/0055
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
-
BILLS
-
Social Security Legislation Amendment (Family Participation Measures) Bill 2011
- Second Reading
-
In Committee
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Bernardi, Sen Cory
- Collins, Sen Jacinta
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Third Reading
- Business Names Registration (Application of Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011
-
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011
- Second Reading
-
In Committee
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- Procedural Text
- Division
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Siewert, Sen Rachel
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Xenophon, Sen Nick
- McLucas, Sen Jan
- Third Reading
-
Social Security Legislation Amendment (Family Participation Measures) Bill 2011
- BUSINESS
- BILLS
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Carbon Pricing
(Cormann, Sen Mathias, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Afghanistan
(Brown, Sen Bob, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Mining
(Brown, Sen Carol, Sherry, Sen Nick) -
Member for Dobell
(Ronaldson, Sen Michael, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Asylum Seekers
(Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, Ludwig, Sen Joe) -
Mining
(Bishop, Sen Mark, Wong, Sen Penny)
-
Carbon Pricing
- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- PETITIONS
- NOTICES
- BUSINESS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS
- BUSINESS
- COMMITTEES
- NOTICES
- BILLS
- COMMITTEES
- MOTIONS
- MATTERS OF URGENCY
- MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- DOCUMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- DELEGATION REPORTS
- DOCUMENTS
- BILLS
- MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
- BILLS
- ADJOURNMENT
- DOCUMENTS
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
Carbon Pricing (Question No. 1018)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Asylum Seekers (Question No. 1206)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Question No. 1213)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (Question No. 1216)
(Boswell, Sen Ronald, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Question No. 1241)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Question No. 1242)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Question No. 1267)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Human Services (Question No. 1272)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Arbib, Sen Mark) -
Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (Question No. 1274)
(Fifield, Sen Mitch, Arbib, Sen Mark) -
Fair Work Ombudsman (Question No. 1310)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher)
-
Carbon Pricing (Question No. 1018)
Page: 8963
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (12:13): Just so that I am absolutely clear about what the Greens are not supporting and about our position: we are of a mind at this stage to support these amendments. We believe they maintain the secretary's discretion to be able to:
… make a determination under this section in relation to the person if the Secretary is satisfied that the person is the principal carer of one or more children, and that:
(a) the person is a registered and active foster carer; or
(b) the person is a home educator of that child, or one or more of those children; or
(c) the person is a distance educator of that child, or one or more of those children; or
(d) under a family law order that the person is complying with, a child, of whom the person is a relative (other than a parent), is to live with the person.
And then section 502D(3A), as I understand it—the other one—applies too: the secretary may make a determination under this section in relation to the person if the secretary is satisfied that the person is the principal carer for four or more children. I have questions of both Senator Bernardi, as the opposition is moving these amendments, and the government. Why does the government think it is appropriate that the secretary not have the power to make such a determination? These are very important categories, and I would have thought it would have been appropriate to exempt them. I must admit I am supporting this although we are not supporting the bill. If this bill goes through, as it is indicated to be highly likely to, we believe these exemptions should be kept in place. I ask Senator Bernardi whether it is your intention, by moving these amendments, to keep in place those exemptions for those particular categories? Am I correct in that understanding?