Labor Senators note the in-principle support for the bill offered by stakeholders who represent the interests of social security recipients and front-line service delivery organisations, including; the Australian Council of Social Services, the National Social Security Rights Network and Anglicare Australia. However, all submissions and witnesses – other than Government agencies – raised significant concerns about the Government’s ability to implement the changes in the bill smoothly and effectively.
The National Social Security Rights Network, raised the following concerns about the transition from the current reporting arrangement, to the new arrangements proposed in the bill:
We're particularly concerned about the transition periods, where we understand that people will actually need to do some manual calculations to make sure that the period that the data relates to is correct. That particular period is, I think, going to be fraught, and there are going to need to be additional resources from Services Australia to support people through that period.
Concerns about the capacity of the Government to effectively implement changes to systems on which social security recipients rely were also shared by the Australian Unemployed Workers Union:
While we support the idea of making income support reporting simpler, the recent experience with robodebt offers salient warnings about the harms that arise when the algorithms that inform income imputations do not reflect the reality of variable income many underemployed workers experience. The robodebt experience shows how the design and digitisation initiatives too often occurs in a vacuum, with insufficient testing of the concepts on human subjects and with a disregard for the suffering that arises when these initiatives fail to work as intended.
These concerns are acute among organisations that work on a daily basis with social security recipients. Largely because of inadequate testing and consultation with the people who will need to report income in a new way. This concern, and the likely solution, was pointed out by the Australian Council of Social Services:
We'd like to see the system tested on a large number of people in different circumstances and who live in different areas of Australia, with different access to online forms of communication, access to Services Australia et cetera. We think that there is no need to rush this bill. We need to see that comprehensive testing of the new scheme before it commences so that we can guard against any issues or problems that may exist in the scheme or that haven't been detected.
Importantly, we want to see testing with social security law experts and not just people who could be affected down the road. That's because they can often identify issues that people who would be using the scheme may not be aware of, simply because they have a decent understanding of social security law. If we compare it what happened with robodebt, there was no consultation there with experts at all.
Anglicare Australia shared these concerns about the Government’s ability to effectively manage change to systems, and pointed out the importance of investing in the systems on which many Australian rely in order to make them easier, simpler and better to use:
Centrelink has not demonstrated its organisational ability to enact automated systems. There is a lot going on at Centrelink at the moment, and it would be really good to see demonstrated consolidation of the current lessons to assist in the future changes. These changes must be seen as an investment into a better system for Australians. They will not work for the people using Centrelink if they're viewed as a cost-cutting exercise. An investment outlook will involve careful design and testing, but it will, ultimately, deliver better outcomes for everyone.
Witnesses were particularly concerned about the likelihood that many social security recipients would be underpaid during the fortnight of transition to the new income reporting system. This is because people could easily double-report income under the old system and the new system. ACOSS described this likely scenario from the point of view of a social security recipient who also works:
I think there is a large likelihood that people will make a mistake with that calculation because it would be very easy to do. We know that more than half a million people report income in any given fortnight, so there is a huge risk that a large number of people will make an error when they make that calculation. Going to your question of whether or not people should be penalised, I think there should be a level of understanding from the government that people may well make a mistake and that people should not be penalised unduly if they report their income incorrectly. Our concern is that people double-count income as opposed to under-report income. As we know, there is no obligation on the government to detect any underpayments that may be made and that responsibility rests solely with the individual concerned, which is why we are calling for the government to use any tools it might have to pick up on instances of double-counting and try and work with the person concerned to ensure that they are receiving the correct entitlement for that period. Given that it is only one fortnight that will constitute the transition period, I think it is only fair that the government plays its part here to ensure that people do receive the income support to which they are entitled.
Labor Senators support the recommendations of the Committee Report, including that:
further targeted consultation and user testing is undertaken prior to the commencement of the simplified income reporting system to ensure that the measures, and associated information and supports, are capable of meeting the needs of all income support recipients; and
the Government give a commitment to initiate a review of the implementation of the simplified income reporting measures within 12 months of commencement of the legislation and that a report of the review be tabled in the parliament.
Recommendation
In addition to the recommendations of the Committee Report, Labor Senators recommend that the Government take all reasonable steps during the period of transition to the new income reporting system to detect, confirm and correct over-reporting of income. This is essential to ensure payments are correct and reflects the Government’s moral duty of care to use the available information and systems to make sure social security recipients receive accurate payments.
Recommendation
Labor Senators also recommend the one-year review of the implementation of the changes proposed in the bill is conducted independently and that consultation with experts and the social security recipients is part of the review process.
Senator Malarndirri McCarthy