Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. In particular, I wish to commend Minister Plibersek on introducing the debt reform measures and expanding access to the special-circumstances waiver for social security debts. The proposal to raise the threshold for small debt waivers and to index this threshold in future is supported by a number of advocates and experts, because it eases hardship for people who are on the lowest incomes while also reducing the administrative burden on Services Australia. It's a win-win reform, and I support that measure.

I'd also like to make clear my support for the expansion of the special-circumstances waiver and the intention to make the waiver more easily available to those dealing with the difficult circumstances of family and domestic violence. This is a waiver that allows the government to choose not to pursue individuals for debts. In technical terms, the special-circumstances waiver provisions in each act, once amended, will extend the waiver in three situations where it wasn't previously available: firstly, where the debtor caused the overpayment by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation but the debtor's actions were justified in the circumstances; secondly, where a person other than the debtor caused the debt by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation but the debtor was not aware of the other person's actions; and, thirdly, where a person other than the debtor caused the debt by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation and the debtor was aware of the person's actions but their failure to correct the issue was justified in the circumstances.

In practical terms, expansion of the special-waiver provision will now include debts incurred through family and domestic violence, coercive control and comparable circumstances. If a victim-survivor of abuse was not aware of their partner's actions in creating debt, the waiver can be applied to their debt.

In the process of reviewing this legislation I reached out to a number of lawyers and advocates in my electorate to see how the bill would impact my constituents. Dr Lisha van Reyk from Deserving Better WA, an organisation that supports and advocates for people suffering domestic and family violence, said, 'It's significant and much-needed reform.' She said that Deserving Better has seen many examples of financial abuse intersecting with social security debt. This includes cases where perpetrators have accrued debt in the victim's name, where debts are shared, where tax records show income under the victim's name despite their never having access to these funds, and even a couple of situations where debt continues to be accrued in the victim's name after separation. Dr van Reyk did express concern, however, about the practical application of the reform, because the decision ultimately rests with individual Services Australia staff, and it relies heavily on their understanding of coercion and financial abuse, as well as their empathy in applying the waiver.

It also depends on victims being able to clearly articulate their circumstances, which is often something that's extremely difficult if they are living in fear, trying to navigate the system and simultaneously trying to detach from an abusive relationship. One of the lawyers I spoke to said that, in Western Australia, victims of family and domestic violence can already terminate a residential tenancy by citing domestic violence as the reason. She said these reforms are a natural extension of those existing protections and remedies for genuine victims. Many of her clients raised financial abuse as part of their experience. Most often, it involves control of bank accounts and restrictions on what can and cannot be spent. At times, it extends to taking out credit, such as loans or credit cards, in the client's name without consent.

I thank Dr van Reyk and the lawyers who spoke to me about this issue and commend them on the really important work that they do in our community. I'll continue to advocate for appropriate funding for community organisations like Deserving Better, which provide support for women experiencing family and domestic violence and coercive control.

I note that this bill is being considered by a Senate committee, with the first public hearing held recently. A common issue with process in this place means that we in the lower house are being asked to analyse and debate legislation before we've seen the outcomes of the review. I note that there are already a few suggested amendments to this bill from experts and advocates, including Anglicare, Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS, which I hope will be proposed and debated in the Senate.

I'm supportive of any measure that can better support survivors-victims of coercive control and of family and domestic violence from having the additional burden of debt being enforced by government agencies. I urge the government to listen to the advocates operating at the front lines of community services and constructively consider any amendments proposed.

See this speech in context