Dissenting Report from Coalition Senators

Introduction

1.1Coalition Senators do not believe this bill should be passed.This bill represents the codification of a deal struck between the Albanese Labor Government and Independent Senator David Pocock[1] and does not offer any meaningful assistance to vulnerable Australians.

1.2It will not achieve its goals, and its key recommendations will likely be ignored, as was the case for the interim Committee’s main recommendation last year.[2]

1.3Coalition Senators believe that an Australian taxpayer earns every dollar the government spends. When we spend money on social services, it should be to improve the lives of our most vulnerable directly, and not to establish another Labor advisory committee.

Background

1.4The Albanese Labor Government announced the establishment of the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee on 27 November 2022.

1.5The Committee was set up to advise the government ahead of every federal budget, on ways to boost economic inclusion and tackle disadvantage.

1.6An interim Committee was established on 16 December 2022, with the government committing to legislating a permanent role for the Committee in 2023.

Purpose of the Bill

1.7The Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee Bill 2023 establishes the Committee on a permanent, statutory basis.

Role and Composition of the Committee

1.8The Committee will bring together a diverse range of stakeholders to advise the government on policy settings, systems and structures that may help to address complex social problems.

1.9In line with the interim Committee's structure, the permanent Committee will comprise a Chair and 13 members, consisting of an economist, academics, and business representatives and community advocates. It is not clear why it includes a union representative. And there is no one from a training organisation or TAFE.

1.10These members will be appointed by the Minister for Social Services in collaboration with the Treasurer. They will serve on a part-time basis for three years and may be reappointed after their term concludes.

1.11The bill tasks the committee, as an official entity that offers guidance to the government before each Federal Budget, to provide annual reports to the government containing independent, expert recommendations.

1.12These recommendations encompass guidance on income support payments, strategies for reducing obstacles to employment and economic integration, especially for individuals who have been unemployed for an extended period and disadvantaged or disengaged populations.

1.13The Committee will deliver the annual report to the government encompassing a range of topics, with a primary emphasis on economic inclusion, enhanced participation, the adequacy and sustainability of income support payments, and the reduction of obstacles to economic involvement.

1.14When formulating its report, the Committee is obliged to take into consideration the government's economic and fiscal outlook and fiscal strategy.

1.15The bill establishes the Committee as an official entity to offer guidance to the government before each Federal Budget.

1.16The Committee's findings will be made available on the Department of Social Services website.

1.17The bill mandates that the committee consider and incorporate the government's economic and fiscal projections, fiscal strategy, workforce participation rates, existing pertinent policies, and the enduring viability of the social security system within the broader budgetary framework when presenting its report.

1.18The bill grants the Treasurer and Minister for Social Services the authority to seek advice from the committee regarding specific matters.

1.19This directive power is established to ensure the government can access the Committee's insights and recommendations, for instance, with respect to certain groups of people, a specific region, or a particular policy area.

1.20The Committee’s membership is:

The Hon Jenny Macklin AC (Chair);

Mr Bran Black (Business Council of Australia);

Professor Jeff Borland (The University of Melbourne);

Professor Bob Breunig (Australian National University);

Ms Emily Carter (Chief Executive Officer of Marninwarntikura Women’s Resource Centre);

Professor Kay Cook (Swinburne University of Technology);

Mr Matthew Cox (The Bryan Foundation);

Dr Cassandra Goldie AO (Australian Council of Social Service);

Dr Angela Jackson (Impact Economics and Policy);

Mr Travers McLeod (Brotherhood of St Laurence);

Ms Sally McManus (Australian Council of Trade Unions); and

Associate Professor Ben Phillips (Australian National University).

Pointless Advisory Committee

1.21Coalition Senators heard evidence from witnesses that argued the continuation of the Committee in its current form is pointless as it has no authority or independence, it merely pays lip service to addressing the needs of our most vulnerable.

1.22During the Canberra hearings, Ms O’Connell from the Antipoverty Centre rejected the Committee in its proposed form.She stated:

Ultimately, we do not want a committee like this and the reports it produces to be used to manufacture consent for policies that are not supported by people in the welfare system or that don't meet our needs.[3]

1.23This echoes a sentiment from the Antipoverty Centre’s submission where they said ‘This bill represents the latest in a long line of severe disappointments for people in poverty since Labor took government’.[4]

1.24It is the opinion of Coalition Senators that this bill, and the Committee it seeks to establish, is the latest in a series of hollow policies from the Albanese Labor Government.

Outsourcing Representation

1.25Many of the submissions mentioned the need to hear from those with direct experience when it comes to economic exclusion.They raised concerns around representation.

1.26In their submission the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) stated that at a bare minimum ‘people directly affected as well as people working in organisations representing people with lived experience must form a minimum proportion of the Committee Membership’.[5]

1.27This view was further reiterated during the Canberra hearing when Ms Nolan from the Brotherhood of St Lawrence said ‘It really comes down to that issue of representation’.[6]

1.28Coalition Senators agree that the formation of policy requires input from experts and those with direct experience.

1.29However, where we disagree with the Brotherhood of St Laurence and ACCOS, and what forms our fundamental opposition to this bill is that it is the role of the Minister, and parliamentarians to be hearing from people with direct experience and experts.It is our role as representatives to be creating policy.

1.30What this bill does is it outsources parliamentary and ministerial responsibility to an unelected and unaccountable committee.

Lacks Transparency, Independence, and Oversight

1.31Almost all evidence raised serious concerns regarding the transparency, independence and inclusivity of this advisory committee.

1.32When asked about whether this Bill does enough to address transparency concerns, Dr Goldie from ACOSS said ‘No, I don't think it's enough to secure the openness and transparency of the operations of the committee’.[7]

1.33A similar sentiment was echoed by Ms O’Connell when in response to a question about transparency and independence she stated:

… transparency does not solve the problem. It is important, but if you are being transparent about the fact that the minister told the committee what it can and can't look at then it doesn't really change the fundamental problem, which is that the minister told the committee what it can and can't look at ...[8]

1.34In their submission, the Salvation Army again expressed a similar sentiment when they stated ‘Critically, we see that for the EIAC to fulfill its potential there must be sufficient independence and transparency…’[9]

1.35As established in the bill, the committee only answers to the responsible ministers, and Committee membership is entirely at the pleasure of those ministers.

1.36This means there is zero accountability, independence or transparency over the way in which the Committee functions, what it may or may not investigate and whether it releases its findings.

1.37It is an outrageous sidestepping of ministerial responsibility and ultimately creates a body with zero oversight, not that of Parliament nor the public.

1.38Because of these concerns, and the outsourcing of responsibility, coalition senators cannot accept this Bill in any form.

Waste of Taxpayer Money

1.39In a time where it couldn’t be harder to be an Australian, with the cost of living skyrocketing, the Albanese Labor Government wants to spend $8.7 million over 4 years on an unaccountable and powerless advisory committee, noting that it can ignore advice if it is in their political interests to do so.

1.40This is in complete opposition to the Coalition, which has been recommending practical measures to help Australia’s most vulnerable, such as an increase the income free thresholds of the JobSeeker payment and related working-age payments by $150 a fortnight to incentivise recipients to enter the workforce.

1.41If the Albanese Government was interested in doing its job it would get out there to talk with those in need and save taxpayers $8.7 million.

Conclusion

1.42Given the serious flaws within the committee as proposed, Coalition Senators cannot support this bill.

1.43This bill embodies a government more interested in acting for vested interests than doing its job, a government more interested in outsourcing its responsibilities than developing policy, and a government more interested in secrecy than transparency.

1.44Coalition Senators believe the bill should not be passed.

Senator Maria KovacicSenator Kerrynne Liddle

Footnotes

[1]Labor strikes deal with David Pocock to pass IR laws, https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/government-strikes-deal-with-david-pocock-to-allow-it-to-pass-ir-laws-20221127-p5c1km.html.

[2]Presented with a JobSeeker finding too clear to ignore, he changed the subject: how Jim Chalmers is shaping the budget, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-03/jobseeker-finding-ignore-jim-chalmers-shaping-budget/102293194.

[3]Ms Kristin O’Connell, Research, Policy and Communications, Antipoverty Centre, Committee Hansard, 10 November 2023, p. 5.

[4]Antipoverty Centre, Submission 2, p. 4.

[5]Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS), Submission 15, p. 3.

[6]Ms Cara Nolan, Senior Advisor, Brotherhood of St Laurence, Committee Hansard, 10 November 2023, p. 12.

[7]Dr Cassandra Goldie, Chief Executive Officer, Australian Council of Social Service, Committee Hansard, 10 November 2023, p. 11.

[8]Ms Kristin O’Connell, Research, Policy and Communications, Antipoverty Centre, Committee Hansard, 10 November 2023, p. 7.

[9]The Salvation Army, Submission 5, p. 5.