Mr SU KKAR (Deakin) (15:25): Someone who is respected across this chamber—indeed, someone who is respected throughout Australia—Noel Pearson, said the following at a recent Senate committee hearing, referring to the disgraceful decision of the government to abolish the CDC: You will repeal the card and then you will walk away and leave us to the violence, leave us to the hunger, leave us to the neglected children. It's very easy to forget about remote communities. That's not the opposition speaking; that's one of the most respected Indigenous leaders in this country, eviscerating this ideological decision by the government to abolish the CDC. In this place we often argue about very fine areas of difference. As a general rule, 90 per cent of the time we don't look at the motives of those opposite and think they are anything other than good. But in this instance we've got an example of a minister and a prime minister who are seeking to abolish the cashless debit card. That, we know with certainty, will have a few consequences. The consequences, we know, will be: more violence in remote communities; more drunkenness in remote communities; more drugs in remote communities; and more neglected children in remote communities. We know that will be the outcome of this decision, and this minister and Prime Minister have completely botched this process. The only decent thing to do now is walk away from this shameful decision—a decision that will, in the words of Noel Pearson, see more children neglected. The cashless debit card operates in a number of communities—Ceduna, East Kimberley, the Goldfields in WA, Bundaberg, Hervey Bay and Cape York. We have seen in each and every one of those communities, since the cashless debit card has been in place, reduced antisocial behaviour, reduced consumption of alcohol, reduced consumption of drugs and attendance at school increasing. Ms Rishworth: What evidence! In your imagination! Mr SUKKAR: Yet we have a minister with the absolute gall to stand there interjecting. How on earth could anyone walk into this chamber and make a decision knowing that children will be abused and neglected as a result? That is the outcome of this decision! The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Claydon ): The minister, on a point of order? Ms Rishworth: On reflections on other members. I ask him to withdraw. Opposition members interjecting— Ms Rishworth: It is a reflection! It is! The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Will you withdraw? Mr SUKKAR: No. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That's very unparliamentary of you. Mr SUKKAR: Sorry—what's the unparliamentary remark? The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Have you reflected badly on the member opposite? Mr SUKKAR: No. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will be listening extremely carefully to you. If I ask you to withdraw, next time you will think deeply about doing so. Mr SUKKAR: The decision to abolish the cashless debit card, in Noel Pearson's words, will see the government leaving affected communities with violence, hunger and neglected children. I can understand why the minister's a bit touchy about that. We'll see neglected children! That will be the outcome of the decision made by this government to abolish the cashless debit card. Members opposite might be very touchy about this, and so they should be. In fact, I know there are a number of very good people in the Labor Party who are utterly ashamed of the decision of the Prime Minister and this minister to impose this absolute tragedy on affected communities. There are 17,000 participants at present on the cashless debit card. What has been the process by which this government now wants to rip a tool we know is working, a tool that is improving the lives of women and children, in particular, out of those communities? Anyone with any common sense will accept that the inevitable outcome of putting more alcohol and more drugs into these communities will be devastating for them. The least we could expect from this minister is that she would consult with those communities. Let's hear about the consultation from this hapless minister. The consultation involved a number of documents being sent to affected communities on 30 August. Honourable members interjecting— Mr SUKKAR: No, hear me out, colleagues. On 30 August, the so-called CDC engagement team sent to the Goldfields a raft of documents to commence the process of consultation. There was a draft engagement plan, an engagement summary, a participation checklist, a CDC fact sheet, all very bureaucratic. That was the consultation that started on the 30 August, and they were given until midday on 2 September to come back, from 30 August to 2 September. This hapless minister, who's engaging in meaningful consultation, has given these communities less than three days to come back on an issue that is going to see devastation hitting their communities. The minister opposite might not like the quotes that are about to come up, but these are quotes from the communities that will have the CDC ripped out of them. Ian Trust from the Wunan Foundation said: It reduced the alcohol violence and the harassment of the elderly and vulnerable for cash when they used to go to the ATM … The government says if we want to go down that path of keeping income management that it has to be a community decision, but there's no information about how they want us to arrive at that decision or what the replacement could be. Tammy Williams from the Family Responsibilities Commission said: We are looking at going back to a card that doesn't match the technology of the CDC, and people will have limited access to their money, won't be able to utilise online shopping or travel outside their communities. But it's even worse; the government is not even proposing anything viable in the place of the CDC, hence why there are so many fears about what is going to come. Mayor Perry Will from the District Council of Ceduna said: 'The first we heard of it was in the PM's election promises that he was going to do it. Prior to that, we had no representation from any Labor politicians.' Oh, she met with him after she made the announcement! That's wonderful consultation. Ms Rishworth: I turned up. I had a meeting with him—two hours! Mr SUKKAR: I'll keep taking these interjections if the hapless minister wants to continue to provide them. This is a crucial matter for our parliament. In my opening remarks to this bill, when the minister introduced it, I had a very different tone. I appeal to the decency of those opposite, the decency that I know is there amongst virtually all members of this House, the decency that you would not make a decision that you know is going to hurt children. And yet they proceed with this destructive course. If you don't want to listen to me, listen to people who are in the affected communities about the impact of the CDC. Again, this is from Perry Will in Ceduna: 'Don't take it away.' He was saying, 'Look out the window. Take a walk around. See the difference for yourself. The CDC's been terrific for the town in reducing violence, increasing tourism, improving safety for women.' The list of quotations is extraordinarily long. From a refuge worker in the East Kimberley—this is probably the most powerful: 'Since the CDC, the seriousness of assaults seen by the refuge has declined.' So, Minister, do not— (Time expired)