JobKeeper Payment

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (14:59): My question is also to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer indicate how many businesses in South Australia have been benefitting from the JobKeeper and what is the importance to South Australia of today's statements on extending the scheme?

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:59): The announcements today by the commonwealth government, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer I am sure are very warmly received by all Australians, but in particular all South Australians. There has been a significant level of concern amongst the business community, particularly amongst small and medium-sized businesses, in South Australia as to what would be the federal government's intentions in relation to JobKeeper in particular post September, bearing in mind that we are only three months through the original six months projected for the operation of the scheme.

The state government has been active publicly and privately, advocating for a continuation of JobKeeper, and we therefore warmly welcome the announcement by the commonwealth government today of the extension for a period of six months in relation to JobKeeper, albeit in a tailored fashion, post the end of September.

The answer to the honourable member's question is that it is difficult to provide precise numbers of the number of South Australian businesses and organisations that have benefited from JobKeeper. The commonwealth government and the ATO don't provide precise breakdowns to each of the states and territories. However, our state Treasury has estimated, on the basis of the publicly available national information and the other publicly available information, that in their estimation approximately 50,000 South Australian businesses have benefited from the implementation of JobKeeper in South Australia. It might be marginally higher than that, but nevertheless that is the conservative estimate from state Treasury in relation to the number of businesses that might have benefited.

The announcement of the commonwealth government will mean that post September there are stricter eligibility requirements. Certainly, the review—not that I have read all of the review, but I have read summaries and excerpts of the findings of the review—has highlighted areas where the operation of the scheme might be improved in the future.

Whereas the first six months of the scheme operated on a comparison of one month this year compared to one month in previous years to establish an entitlement for a six-month period, my initial advice is that the entitlement to continue beyond September will be over a longer period of time—not just one month compared to one month in a previous year, but on a quarter by quarter basis. I think in aggregate it will require that in two consecutive quarters the decline in turnover is greater than 30 per cent, as opposed to a single month comparison under the initial eligibility criteria.

There will also be tailored operation of JobKeeper for those closer to full-time employment at a high level of payment and those who might have been working and earning for less than 20 hours a week at a lower level. I think all members will have been informed by, in particular, cafe owners and some hotel operators of some people who might have only been working for a modest number of hours per week and not earning a significant sum of money who were then receiving $1,500 under JobKeeper, significantly more than they had been for some period of time whilst working pre-COVID. The tailored arrangement is intended to, at least in part, as I understand it, canvass for those sorts of examples as well.

I am sure all businesses—small, medium and large—in South Australia will welcome the initiative from the federal government. Certainly, the state government welcomes the initiative. In addition to the enormous success of HomeBuilder, it would appear that in South Australia the JobKeeper extension will also be very warmly received by business.