LABOR SENATORS' DISSENTING REPORT
Key issues
1.1
Labor Senators do not support a number of recommendations contained in
the Chair’s report into the Social Security Legislation Amendment
(Strengthening the Job Seeker Compliance Framework) Bill 2014 (the bill), and
remark that neither the bill nor the committee hearings provided clarity as to
whether the bill would actually assist the most vulnerable in society to gain
employment.
1.2
We note the extremely short time frame given to the committee to conduct
its inquiry into the bill, and as such, provide only an outline of key issues
and recommendations of the Labor Senators of the committee.
Removal of appeal rights
1.3
Labor Senators strongly oppose Item 10 of the bill, which inserts new
paragraph 129(4)(b), expanding the list of decisions that are not reviewable by
the Department of Social Security Secretary (Secretary) under subsection 129(1)
of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999, to include decisions
made under subsections 42SA(1) or 42SA(2A); that is, a determination by the
Secretary that a participation payment is not payable to a person who has
failed to attend a required appointment or participate in a required activity.
1.4
Similarly, Item 11 of the bill amends paragraph 144(fa) to include
decisions made under subsections 42SA(1) or 42SA(2A), thereby ensuring that
people who incur a non-payment penalty for failing to attend a required
appointment or participate in a required activity cannot have this decision
reviewed by the Social Security Appeal Tribunal.
1.5
Labor Senators were compelled by the overwhelming majority of submitters
who strongly objected to the removal of appeal rights in relation to compliance
suspension decisions. We agree that appeal rights are ‘a fundamental principle
of the social security system to ensure transparency and fairness.’[1]
1.6
Labor Senators wish to note evidence provided by the National Welfare
Rights Network (NWRN) with regard to review process:
...restricting appeal rights on the basis that few people would
exercise the right to appeal, or that the impact on people would be small,
ignores the general unfairness. It also ignores the potential disengagement and
undermining of a person’s relationship with DHS and employment services that
can occur when a person cannot correct a decision, even if the financial loss
was only temporary.[2]
1.7
Jobs Australia, who the Labor Senators note were otherwise reasonably
supportive of the bill, also submitted similar concerns about the removal of
the availability of administrative review of the decision to suspend payments:
The denial of review rights reduces accountability in the
system and may encourage less prudent decision-making... and we believe that any
decisions that affect a person’s payments should be reviewable as a matter of
principle.[3]
1.8
Labor Senators of the committee were compelled by the evidence opposing
changes to the review process, and express concerns that Items 10 and 11 of the
bill encroach on Australians’ fundamental rights to review of government
decisions.
Recommendation 1
1.9
In order for the status quo to be maintained so that job seekers retain
their right to review of decisions to suspend payments, Labor Senators
recommend that the bill be amended to remove Items 10 and 11.
Removal of current concessions for over 55’s
1.10
Currently, under subsection 502A(1) of the Social Security Act 1991,
persons aged 55 years and over who are in receipt of an activity tested income
support payment (Newstart Allowance, Parenting Payment and Special Benefit) may
be deemed to have satisfied the requirements of the activity test where they
have in the fortnightly payment period engaged in at least 30 hours’ approved
voluntary work, a combination of voluntary and paid work, or, paid work.[4]
1.11
Labor Senators understand that it is the intention of the government
that the current concessions received by job seekers aged 55 to 59 years and
receiving Job Services Australia assistance will be removed by a legislative
instrument.[5]
1.12
Submissions and evidence in opposition to this was overwhelming, and
compelling arguments were outlined by almost all submitters.[6]
1.13
The Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) submitted that it
was difficult to see justification for the proposed changes to the current
arrangements for job seekers over 55 years of age, due to the limited job
opportunities for those particular jobseekers, and the suggestion that people
would willingly retire on Newstart is strongly contested.[7]
1.14
St Vincent De Paul supported this evidence in their submission, and
further noted that pervasive age discrimination is well-documented in
Australia, with nearly one in three unemployed people aged 45 years and over
describing their main obstacle to finding work as being considered too old by
employers.[8]
Labor Senators are not aware of any evidence that the negative attitudes
towards older workers have improved to the point where it is appropriate to
remove this provision for jobseekers over 55 years of age.
1.15
Labor Senators also refer to the Bills Digest relevant to this bill,
which notes:
In the absence of concerted and sustained efforts to tackle
the many structural barriers to mature age employment participation, some
commentators have argued that it would not be appropriate to do away with the
different activity test arrangements that apply to job seekers aged 55 years
and over. For example, the National Welfare Rights Network has pointed out
that, having conducted an inquiry into Commonwealth legal barriers to older
persons participating in the workforce or other productive work, the Australian
Law Reform Commission (ALRC) decided against proposing any changes to the
concessional activity test. In doing so, the ALRC argued that the concessional
activity test requirement did not appear to be acting as a barrier to mature
age participation, and that it ‘recognises the value of volunteering, not only
as a potential pathway to paid employment, but also as a form of productive
work in its own right’.[9]
Recommendation 2
1.16
Due to the significant and overwhelming evidence presented by submitters
in opposition to the removal of concessions for jobseekers over 55 years of age
and in order for the status quo is maintained so that jobseekers over 55 years
of age retain adequate concessions in respect of their circumstances, Labor
Senators recommend that the bill be amended to remove Items 13–19 of the bill.
Start date for penalties
1.17
Labor Senators echo the Chair’s report that many submitters were of the
view that penalties should be imposed only once a person has been notified of
their failure to attend a scheduled appointment, rather than from the time of
the missed appointment.
1.18
Labor Senators support the evidence presented by the NWRN, who assert
that a penalty from the day of the missed appointment risks punitive action
against people who possibly missed an appointment without realising. We also
support the recognition in the Chair’s report that Indigenous Australians
living in remote communities may be particularly affected by problems with
notification and reconnection processes.[10]
1.19
As such, Labor Senators would support the implementation of safeguards,
as described by the NWRN in their submission to the committee.[11]
Recommendation 3
1.20
Labor Senators recommend the implementation of safeguards with respect
to the start date of penalties for job seekers failing to attend appointments
with job service providers.
Recommendation 4
1.21
If the bill is not amended to reflect the recommendations contained in this
dissenting report, that the bill be rejected in its entirety.
Senator Sue Lines
Deputy Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page