Scott Morrison’s appointment to social services portfolio gives the government the chance to ‘reset the agenda’, says the president of People with Disability

This article is more than 5 years old

This article is more than 5 years old

The government should rethink some of its most controversial policy measures in the wake of Sunday’s cabinet reshuffle, advocacy groups have said.

The Australian Council of Social Services (Acoss) said the government must abandon unpopular welfare policies announced in the budget, such as stopping young jobseekers from receiving payments for the first six months of their unemployment.

It said: “The community has voiced its strong opposition to the harshest measures in the federal budget. Now is the time for the government to listen to these concerns and bring the community together down a budget reform path which is fair and sustainable.”

On Sunday, Tony Abbott announced a wide-ranging reshuffle that saw the dumping of the defence minister, David Johnston.

The social services minister, Kevin Andrews, will now take that role, while his vacant portfolio will be taken by the immigration minister, Scott Morrison.

The immigration portfolio will be taken by the health minister, Peter Dutton, whose old portfolio will be filled by cabinet newcomer Sussan Ley.

Morrison will also take responsibility for childcare and paid parental leave, key areas of policy for the government.

“I took the opportunity to have a slightly wider reshuffle,” Abbott told the Nine network on Monday. “It will strengthen the government’s economic focus. It does bring Scott Morrison front and centre into the domestic policy debate.

“We have a holistic families package that will be our focus in the new year. We do need a fair dinkum paid parental leave scheme. We do need better child care and we do need to tackle the cost-of-living pressures on families now,” he said.

The president of People with Disability, Craig Wallace, welcomed Morrison’s appointment, saying it gave the government a chance to “reset the agenda” in the social services space.

“Scott Morrison brought an action-oriented style in immigration but we hope he will bring a different approach in social services,” Wallace said.

He criticised Andrews for his lack of consultation, saying he took a “chaotic policy process” in the portfolio.

“We want to engage with the new minister,” Wallace said. “The best way to do that is to work with us.”

Wallace has written to Morrison requesting a meeting, where he will discuss funding certainty for the national disability insurance scheme, increasing workplace opportunities for people with disability and the reinstatement of a disability discrimination commissioner in the Human Rights Commission.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has also requested a meeting with Ley. The vice-president of the AMA, Dr Stephen Parnis said: “We’re looking forward to meeting the new minister as soon as possible.”

He said there were difficulties under Dutton that could have been resolved with greater consultation with health providers and patients. He pointed to the unpopularity of the $7 GP co-payment as an example of a policy that failed because of poor communication with the public and little consultation with stakeholders.

The AMA wants to discuss with Ley issues surrounding funding of healthcare, patient care standards and increased public health measures.

Members of the defence community were more reticent about the appointment of Andrews as the defence minister.

Neil James from the Australia Defence Association accused Andrews of being uninterested in defence, and said the government needed to put younger, up-and-coming politicians into the portfolio.

“The big problem in defence is the portfolio keeps being given to people not in the flower of their parliamentary career, and helps the myth that it devours its ministers. Whereas in fact it tends to be given to people in their final years in parliament,” James told the ABC.

He said changing defence ministers led to uncertainty in the portfolio. “Every time you change the minister there’s often up to six months’ worth of paralysis in policy making while they read into a very difficult portfolio,” James said.

David Jamison from the Defence Force Welfare Association said he believed very little would change as Andrews take the reins, describing him as a politician who takes “a traditional approach” to governance.

He admited the “jury is out” on Andrews and that he was “a bit apprehensive” about the appointment.

He is not hopeful that issues such as superannuation and pay for defence personnel will be resolved with the new minister.

Regarding refugees and asylum seekers, the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC) said it was not hopeful the change in minister would result in a change in the government’s “hardline” approach.

The head of the ASRC, Kon Karapanagiotidis, said: “We will also be seeking to raise concerns about conditions in detention with Minister Dutton and strongly advocating for everyone, particularly children, to be released from detention.”

“We hope the new minister will be ready and willing to listen to the health and safety concerns affecting people in detention that have been raised by many people and many organisations – including medical, legal and human rights organisations – and will be more open to these concerns than the previous minister.”

The reintroduction of a cabinet minister for science, which was scrapped when the Coalition came to power in September 2013, has also been cautiously welcomed.

The Australian Academy of Science said it hoped Ian Macfarlane, who has added science to his existing industry portfolio, would take into account the needs of the scientific community.

Professor Andrew Holmes, the president of the academy, said: “Having a minister identifiably responsible for science is a very significant forward step for this government. We very much hope that this signifies that the government is placing greater value on the importance of science and technology to all Australians.”