Motions

Coronavirus

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. M.C. Parnell (resumed on motion).

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (20:54): I thank honourable members for their forbearance in allowing my brief contribution to this particular private members' motion to be adjourned so that I could at least participate in part of the Board of Treasurers teleconference. I will speak briefly to the bill; I am not sure who else spoke prior to the dinner break, other than the Hon. Ms Franks.

The motion that has been moved by the Hon. Mr Parnell is lofty in its goals and broad in its nature in an earnest endeavour, I think, to allow it to be all-encompassing and supported by all, and I am here to indicate that I think he has succeeded. As hard as I looked, I could not find anything too offensive to justify me speaking against the motion, so I will, on behalf of government members, indicate our broad support.

I suspect, as cleverly crafted as it is, that in some areas the words are broad enough to allow the Hon. Mr Parnell the particular perspective that he might want to bring to bear in relation to how we emerge from COVID-19 in a changed fashion. His views might be slightly different to the views of others and indeed the views of the government, and I think he has, in his drafting, been prepared to acknowledge that we can leave those debates to those specific issues.

Nevertheless, I believe the wording in the five paragraphs of his motion are sufficiently broad to encompass us all and certainly the earnest goal that we do learn lessons from what we are still enduring—I should use the present tense. It has been rightly described as a crisis and there are many lessons that we have learned and can still learn as we look at how we have adapted and coped with the COVID-19 pandemic and, just as importantly, how we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clearly, from the government's viewpoint, we see critical issues as being jobs, jobs, jobs and jobs. We see the notion of being able to keep people gainfully employed with money in their pockets as being a very significant part of any solution, whilst recognising that there will ever be a small number—and we hope an increasingly smaller number—of people who, for a number of reasons, are unable to find gainful employment.

We believe that governments—state, federal and local—and communities need to do what they can to support those who are unable to either obtain or retain gainful employment. With those brief words, I indicate on behalf of government members support for the motion the Hon. Mr Parnell has moved.

The Hon. M.C. PARNELL (20:58): In summing-up, I would like to thank my colleague the Hon. Tammy Franks and thank the Treasurer for speaking to the motion. The Treasurer is absolutely correct in that I have crafted this motion in such a way that it avoids the words that we normally see in motions, such as 'condemn', because what I wanted to achieve in this motion is something that I think goes to the heart of our work, especially this year, and that is: how do we get through this difficult period and how do we make sure that the key values of looking after people and looking after the planet are at the fore?

The Treasurer is also correct in that people can have entirely different approaches as to how they look after people. There are some people for whom trickle-down economics, for example, and ensuring that the rich get fabulously wealthy and that that will trickle down to other people is the path to progress. I do not accept that view, but there are other people who will take a diametrically opposite view about what is best for people.

The key words in the motion were about how do we 'build back better'? I think around the water coolers, and now once again in the front bars, people are having conversations that relate to things such as homelessness. 'How was it that during COVID we got all of the homeless people of the streets? Why don't we keep that going?'

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: We are.

The Hon. M.C. PARNELL: The minister interjects, 'We are,' and that is exactly the sort of thing that I was seeking to elicit in this motion. Similarly, with social security. Whilst that is more the federal responsibility, people have seen that we can lift people out of poverty by paying more in terms of the social safety net, especially for people who are unemployed. I think it would be unacceptable to the vast majority of Australians to put the unemployment benefit—Newstart, JobSeeker, whatever name you want to give it—back to the poverty-guaranteeing levels that it was at before this coronavirus hit.

I am glad the motion will have support. I would have liked a few more members to have taken the effort to put some thought into what the pressing priorities post-COVID should be, but it is what it is. I have given every member the opportunity and I am at least pleased that it will be passed unanimously by the Legislative Council today.

Motion carried.