Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives; however, we do have significant concerns about aspects of the legislation that warrant further scrutiny. At all times you must remember that Australia's social services safety net is one of the strongest and most generous in the world, but it's not self-sustaining. It must be managed responsibly, because it's funded by Australian taxpayers—people who work hard, take risks and carry the task of supporting our social security system.

Few countries in the world provide the kind of social safety net that we enjoy here in Australia. It's something we should be proud of, but it's also something we must safeguard and protect. Our safety net is not funded by government; it is funded by real people—small-business owners, primary producers and those who work on the front line of our essential services. It is funded by small businesses that take risks every single day. They invest their savings, their homes and their livelihoods into building something for themselves, their families and their communities. These are the people who drive innovation and create jobs, who build the very opportunities that allow our economy to thrive. Our safety net is funded by our primary producers, the men and women who work the land through fire, drought and floods, who keep Australians fed and who export beyond our shores, strengthening our national economy. It's funded by those on the front line, the nurses who work the night shift, the teachers who shape the minds of our children and the police who put themselves in harm's way to keep our community safe.

Every dollar spent on social security is a dollar that someone else has earned. That reality imposes a clear responsibility on all of us in this place. It means that every measure, every amendment and every program must be justified. It must be fair, it must be sustainable and it must serve the purpose of helping Australians in genuine need, while maintaining the integrity of the system for the future.

We also have a duty to our future generations. The decisions we make today about the structure and sustainability of the welfare system will determine the cost that future Australians will bear. Our focus must be on ensuring that more Australians are working, contributing to and strengthening the economy, not on keeping people connected to welfare unnecessarily. The welfare system must always be fit for purpose; it must evolve to meet tomorrow's challenges, not remain anchored in the past. Income support should provide a strong and sustainable safety net, protecting our most vulnerable citizens, supporting those experiencing hardship, and providing clear and practical pathways to independence and self-reliance.

The coalition's attention remains on creating jobs and getting Australians back into work, because we know that getting a job is the single best way to improve the living standards of individuals and their families. That principle has guided our approach to social policy, and it continues to guide our thinking in opposition. Of course, these priorities are all the more critical during what has become an enduring Labor induced cost-of-living crisis, which is not going away—a time when Australian households are struggling to keep up with rising expenses, high interest rates and stagnant wages.

When in government, the coalition demonstrated disciplined and responsible economic management. Through that approach, we were able to deliver the largest permanent increase to the JobSeeker payment at that time, ensuring that while there was a safety net for those in need, focus remained on supporting people into employment. In April 2021, the coalition increased working-age payment rates, including JobSeeker, by $50 a fortnight. We also permanently increased the income-free area to $150 a fortnight, giving jobseekers greater flexibility and incentive to take on work as they re-entered the workforce. During the height of the pandemic, one of the greatest economic and social challenges of our generation, the coalition government provided $32 billion in emergency support payments to help Australians get through. This is the record of a coalition government that understands the balance between compassion and responsibility, between helping those that need help and ensuring that the system remains fair to those who fund it.

Turning to the bill before the House, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 contains four schedules that amend a number of acts, including A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999, the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, the Social Security Act 1991 and the Student Assistance Act 1973. These technical amendments in the bill have significant consequences for how social security payments are administered and how debts and undetermined debts are treated. The bill also includes provisions providing clarity to income apportionment, a practice introduced under Labor.

The bill seeks to do several things. It sets out preliminary and definitional matters as well as income apportionment method statements. It validates income apportionment as a method of apportioning employment income in relation to entitlement periods before 7 December 2020. It also clarifies the lawful methods of apportioning employment income when determining debts or rates of payment for periods before that date.

The bill expands the instances in which the special circumstances waiver can be applied to waive debts incurred under the relevant acts. The bill increases to $250 the threshold for waiving a small debt and provides for that threshold to be indexed annually to the CPI. It also provides for a one-off waiver of the Commonwealth's right to recover small undetermined debts worth less than $250 that are currently recorded in Services Australia's system but have yet to be raised. The number of undetermined debts has increased substantially in recent years due to COVID measures and the pausing of debts during the pandemic and times of natural disaster.

Another significant measure is the establishment of the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. The scheme will provide resolution payments to people whose debts were affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. The bill gives the minister power to determine matters relating to the scheme through legislative instrument, and it provides for a new special appropriation to fund these resolution payments. While these measures are significant, they are not without concern.

The first issue relates to the process by which this legislation has been developed. It appears that the income apportionment measures have been informed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman's own-motion investigation and recommendations, yet we are told that there was no direct consultation with the Ombudsman in the development of this legislation. The Ombudsman instead used the Senate committee process to contribute to the bill. That's an extraordinary omission. If the measures stem from the Ombudsman's own findings, it would be reasonable to expect the government to have engaged directly with that office to ensure the legislation aligns with those recommendations.

The second issue is that the timing of this bill raises serious questions. The government has waited until the tail end of the sitting calendar to bring this legislation forward. As a result, scrutiny has been rushed, with only a single day allocated for Senate committee examination. That inquiry heard almost exclusively from social service advocacy and not-for-profit organisations. Many other key stakeholders were simply not consulted. This narrow consultation raises legitimate concerns about how many voices the government listened to when preparing the bill.

The Ombudsman, in its submission to the Senate inquiry, highlighted a serious omission—namely, that the issue of remediation for individuals who have been criminally convicted in relation to debts that were invalidly calculated using income apportionment is not addressed in the bill. That is not what we would call a minor point. It goes to the heart of fairness, accountability and justice. If the government acknowledges that income apportionment was used unlawfully for years, then the question of how that impacts those who face prosecution or conviction as a result cannot simply be left unanswered.

Further, the bill leaves many operational details unresolved. It's not clear how the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme will interact with the Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration, the longstanding framework for compensating individuals adversely affected by administrative errors. Much, it seems, is being left to legislative instruments—we hear this a lot from this government—meaning that critical decisions about the design and implementation of the scheme will be made outside the direct scrutiny of the parliament. That is deeply concerning. Due to the absence of these essential details in the primary legislation, parliament's capacity to properly scrutinise the scheme has been limited. The coalition has been advised that schedule 3, which establishes the resolution scheme, will cost approximately $97.2 million over the forward estimates. Once the delegated legislation is tabled, we will closely examine and consider those instruments to ensure that the scheme is fair to those affected by income apportionment and fair to taxpayers who foot the bill.

There are also unresolved questions about how the special circumstances waiver will operate in practice. The bill provides little detail about the measures, procedures and thresholds that will guide Services Australia in deciding whether special circumstances do exist. Without clear criteria, there is a real risk of inconsistent decision-making and unequal treatment of applicants. We must ask: how will Services Australia seek information from victims-survivors of coercive social security debt, and how will staff be supported to make informed and compassionate decisions? These are not academic questions; they go to the heart of how the law will affect real people.

Minister Plibersek, in her second reading speech, said that existing safeguards would be strengthened to prevent manipulation of the waiver system, yet no detail has been provided on what these strengthened safeguards will look like or how they will operate to prevent misuse or manipulation of the social security safety net. These are issues that must be addressed before the parliament can have full confidence in the practical effect of these amendments.

As the coalition, we will continue to be constructive where we can. We recognise that the bill contains technical corrections and seeks to address longstanding administrative challenges. But we will also continue to hold the government to account on how it develops and implements these measures. The Australian people deserve transparency, accountability and confidence that their parliament is doing its job. We will not oppose this legislation in the House today. However, our concerns remain about the absence of essential operational details on the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme from this primary legislation. As outlined earlier in my contribution, the coalition will closely examine and consider the resolution scheme legislative instrument once it is tabled. We will insist that the government explain how the resolution scheme will operate in practice, how fairness will be guaranteed and how integrity of the bill's measures will be maintained across all aspects of the social security system.

Every dollar spent through the social security system is a dollar earned by hardworking Australians. It is our responsibility, indeed our duty, to ensure that those dollars are spent justly and wisely—in ways that strengthen rather than weaken the foundations of our safety net—and that any fraud is dealt with appropriately. Above all, our task in this place is to ensure that Australia's welfare system remains one that supports people in genuine need, provides real pathways to independence and sustains itself for the generations yet to come. That is the coalition's enduring commitment to fairness, to responsibility and to the integrity of the Australian social security system.

Jo Briskey (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A game changer—that's how Economic Justice Australia described the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. It's a reform that will make our social security system fairer, simpler and more humane. At its heart, this is about people. It's about respect, dignity and decency—values that sit at the centre of Labor's purpose.

For too long, too many Australians have faced unnecessary stress, confusion and, at times, outright injustice through the way our social security debts have been managed. This bill is about fixing those longstanding problems. It reforms how we treat small debts, strengthens protections for survivors of financial abuse and, finally, resolves the decades-old issue of income apportionment once and for all. Taken together, these reforms will wipe away nearly half of the undetermined social security debt backlog, simplify debt management for the future and ensure Services Australia can focus on what matters most: helping people who need support.

Our social security system speaks to who we are as Australians—a fair and compassionate people who believe in lending a hand to those who need it, without judgement. It exists to uphold dignity, not diminish it, yet for too long a flawed system has too often done the opposite. Outdated rules like income apportionment and absurdly low thresholds for small debts have caused needless hardship. This bill recognises that reality and takes decisive action to put things right. The small debt waiver has existed since the nineties, but since its introduction the threshold has remained frozen at $50—not indexed, not adjusted, just stuck. Meanwhile, government payments have tripled in value since 1993. What was once small three decades ago is no longer small today. The result? Services Australia has spent countless hours chasing debts of $50, $70 or $100, sometimes spending more to recover the debt than the value of debt itself. It's wasteful, it's wrong and it causes real harm. Imagine a single parent from Airport West receiving a letter from Services Australia demanding repayment of $75. They've done their best to report every shift, every hour and every payslip, but a small timing error has triggered the debt. That $75 might mean a skipped meal, missed medication or not being able to pay the electricity bill that fortnight. That's not a fair system; that's a failure of compassion. This bill fixes that.

We are lifting the threshold from $50 to $250. That means that in 2025-26 around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived—will never need to be raised in the first place—and 1.2 million Australians will be spared needless anxiety. That's 1.2 million administrative processes removed from the system, and a public service freed up to focus on people, not paperwork. Let me be clear: this is not about letting bad actors off the hook. We are maintaining all safeguards against fraud and deliberate misuse, but what we are saying, and saying clearly, is that the vast majority of people that interact with this system do so in good faith. They deserve a system that treats them with fairness, respect and dignity. This is what responsible government looks like: maintaining compassion with fiscal responsibility. As the Prime Minister has said, kindness is an Australian value, and our government reflects that value in action.

We know that family and domestic violence remains one of the greatest challenges our nation faces. Within that, financial abuse and coercive control are among the most common and devastating forms of harm. Too often, perpetrators weaponise systems—banking, tax and, yes, social security—to entrap their partners. Right now, the law doesn't adequately allow Services Australia to waive debts incurred through coercion or financial abuse. If an abuser-partner forces someone to sign forms, to provide false information or to hide income, that victim can end up carrying a debt that isn't truly theirs. That's cruel, double punishment; it's abuse followed by bureaucracy.

This bill changes that. It gives Services Australia explicit power to waive debts in cases where coercion, control or financial abuse are at play. When an officer considers whether someone knowingly made a false statement, they must take into account the context of coercion or abuse. This reform directly responds to the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse. It aligns with our national plan to end violence against women and children, and it delivers our commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems.

We're not stopping here. The government is consulting on further reforms to ensure that perpetrators, not victims, are held accountable for debts incurred through abuse. This bill is a crucial first step, but it is not the last. For too long, government systems have unwittingly reinforced abuse. This bill begins to undo that.

From 1991 until 2020, Services Australia used a method known as income apportionment. When someone submitted payslips without daily breakdowns, Services Australia would spread their income over multiple fortnights to calculate eligibility. The intent was practical, but the practice was inconsistent with law. It should never have been used that way. To be clear, this government ended income apportionment, but millions of historical debts were calculated by using it.

While we cannot foreseeably reopen every case spanning decades, repayments and even deceased recipients, we can bring legal certainty and moral resolution. That's what this bill does. It provides legal clarity to settle the issue, and it creates the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme to deliver fairness. Under the scheme, people with debts raised between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 can apply for a resolution payment of up to $600, depending on their case. This isn't about compensation for its own sake; it's about acknowledging error—acknowledging that the system got it wrong and giving people closure. To ensure accessibility, the government will support Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS to assist people through this process. Through this scheme, we can provide recognition without reopening old wounds.

One of the clearest lessons from the robodebt royal commission is that governments must never again create or tolerate systems that lack legality, compassion or accountability. Robodebt was different to income apportionment, but the warning is the same. When governments prioritise debt recovery over fairness, they lose sight of their purpose. When flawed methods replace sound judgement, when people are treated as numbers and when harm is dismissed as collateral, trust in government erodes. Trust, once lost, is hard to rebuild. This bill helps rebuild that trust. It brings clarity, it delivers fairness, and it puts compassion back where it belongs—at the heart of public administration.

These reforms will touch the lives of millions, including many in my electorate of Maribyrnong. They will mean that single parents juggling jobs and care won't face the stress of small debts for honest mistakes. Students and apprentices working casual shifts won't be penalised for income mismatches. Pensioners taking on a few hours of work won't lose their dignity over a $100 notice. People with disability will be able to navigate the system without fear of bureaucratic penalty. And victims-survivors of family violence will finally have laws that protect them, not punish them. That is fairness in action. That's government doing what it should: helping people to live with dignity.

These reforms are modest but meaningful. The $250 threshold is practical. Fraud safeguards remain strong. Fiscal discipline remains firm. What changes is the spirit in which this system operates. We're saying that we will not punish honesty. We will not waste dollars chasing cents. We will not allow old, unjust systems to persist simply because they were complicated to fix, because that's not fairness, and it's not government at its best. Government at its best is a force for good. It uses the levers of government to make people's lives better, fairer and kinder. That's what this bill does. It corrects historic wrongs, it reduces stress and red tape, it protects those who've experienced abuse, and it helps rebuild public trust in the system designed to serve us all.

Labor has always believed in a safety net that gives dignity, not despair—a hand up, not a put-down. For too long, these outdated practices stood in the way of that principle. Today we are putting fairness back where it belongs. This bill is fiscally responsible, socially just and morally right. It honours our commitment to women's safety and gender equality. It reflects our values of kindness, fairness and accountability. And it restores dignity to a system that millions of Australians rely on.

For decades, Australians have had to put up with a debt management system that too often has treated them as case numbers instead of people—treated them without dignity. Enough is enough. This is a bill about justice, compassion and common sense. It's about government working for people, not against them. I commend the bill to the House.

Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Link to 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.

Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, which is part of the Albanese Labor government's drive to further strengthen Australia's social safety net.

Social safety nets are designed to provide a basic level of financial and social support to individuals and families in need, helping to alleviate poverty and prevent economic hardship. Social safety nets play a critical part in reducing income inequality by providing a safety net for low-income individuals and families, helping to ensure a minimum standard of living. An effective social safety net can help break the poverty trap by providing resources and support to individuals and families, enabling them to access opportunities and improve their economic situation.

Even in this great and successful country, not everyone has the same opportunity to contribute, to access paid work, to work as much as they want to. Illness, disability, accidents or acting as a carer for others—things that no-one wishes for—sometimes intervene to limit the contribution an individual can make. Sometimes it is simply a case of lightning strikes, meaning access to a fair and effective social safety net is critically important. It is also important to strike a balance between the optimal level of government intervention to provide support and the promotion of agency and individual self-reliance. In this respect, this bill is a significant step towards a fairer, more efficient social security system that better supports Australians when they need it most.

This bill also represents the government's response to the full Federal Court case of Matthew Chaplin v the Department of Social Services, which addressed the method for recalculating robodebt related welfare debts. The case was an appeal on a question of law under section 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, where Mr Chaplin received youth allowance payments under part 2.11 of the Social Security Act 1991, and the question of how and when a person's ordinary income would be considered in the fortnight in which it is first earned, derived or received. In examining this question, the full Federal Court also keenly observed:

As a general proposition, the purpose of benefits under the Act is to "maintain a basic level of income for those who [are] unable to receive sufficient income to provide for themselves".

This is a very articulate expression of the purpose of the social safety net.

Mr Chaplin received youth allowance from 10 July 2014 to 24 June 2015, at a time where a person's entitlement to youth allowance generally ascertained and paid on a fortnightly basis was determined by various matters, including by applying an income reduction to reduce the rate of youth allowance by reference to the person's income. The relevant method statement for calculating the income reduction required the secretary of the department to determine the amount of the person's ordinary income on a fortnightly basis and required ordinary income to be taken into account in the fortnight in which it is first earned, derived or received. It was the operation of these provisions, and the phrase 'first earned, derived or received' in particular, which was the issue that went to the heart of the case.

Over the period he received youth allowance, Mr Chaplin consistently reported his net, not gross, income and thereby received more in youth allowance payments than he was entitled to. In doing so, there was no suggestion of wrongdoing by Mr Chaplin. When it was brought to the attention of the department in 2019, section 1223 of the Social Security Act was enlivened. It provides that:

… if a person receives the benefit of a "social security payment" and was not entitled to obtain that benefit, the amount of the payment (or the relevant part thereof) is a debt due to the Commonwealth, taken to arise when the person obtains the benefit of the payment.

Ascertaining the existence of a debt therefore involves ascertaining a person's entitlement. The next step involves calculating whether the person has received more than that to which they were entitled.

The department therefore set about determining how much Mr Chaplin had been overpaid by reassessing his entitlement by reference to his actual income rather than the lower amounts he had reported. Having determined the amount it considered to have been overpaid, the department issued a demand for repayment. To do this, the department needed to reach a view about the rate of Mr Chaplin's entitlement to youth allowance at the relevant time. The material before the department established that and also established Mr Chaplin earned or derived that income before it was received.

However, for certain amounts of income the evidence was insufficient to reach a conclusion about whether the income was earned and received in the same youth allowance fortnight or was earned in the youth allowance fortnight immediately before that income was received. This then led to income apportionment, which was a practice that was previously used to evenly divide or apportion a person's employment income across two or more Centrelink fortnightly reporting periods to work out the appropriate level of income support a person was entitled to each fortnight. The practice was used if a person's employer pay period didn't line up with the person's fortnightly Centrelink reporting period or if the person's payslip or income report showed total earnings but did not show which days were worked or how much was earned each fortnight and there was no other information available. A person's payment rate was still based on the total income that the person reported across those fortnights, but eligibility or payment rates may have been impacted if the actual days worked in those fortnights were not evenly spread out.

Income apportionment resulted in unfairness, and this bill addresses that. The Albanese Labor government will wipe almost half of Australia's social security debt backlog and roll out resolution payments of up to $600 for those impacted by this historic debt calculation method of income apportionment. Further, a new $300 million package will see investment in a range of measures to ensure our social security system is producing fairer outcomes for Australians. Australians expect and Australians deserve our social security system to be fair and transparent. In situations where the department says there is a debt, it must provide proper and fair evidence and use clear and robust processes that minimise financial distress and confusion for those affected.

Importantly, the threshold for waiving small accidental debts will be increased for the first time in over 30 years, to $250, with around 1.2 million debts expected to be waived or no longer needing to be raised in the 2025-26 financial year as a result. This makes sense. It is often the case that the administrative cost of recouping small accidental debt is higher than the value of the debt itself, making the process of debt recovery inefficient from both a time and a cost perspective. This decision will mean Services Australia can spend more time on significant matters and upholding the integrity of our social security system. To ensure that this waiver is applied fairly, existing safeguards will be strengthened to ensure it cannot be manipulated. For example, it will not be available in circumstances of significant noncompliance or fraud. In those cases, every cent of debt will be pursued.

People with historical debts effected by income apportionment from 2003 to 2020 will also be eligible to apply for a resolution payment in recognition of the fact that we now know that this method of calculating entitlements was invalid. To assist those effected to navigate this resolution scheme, Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service will each be provided with $400,000 of funding. The Albanese Labor government never practiced income apportionment, but we are dealing with its legacy in the most responsible and cost-effective way that we can, and this bill is an important step in the process of systemic reform. In this respect, the bill necessarily also includes a measure to provide legal clarity to this historical practice, which ran through the early 1990s all the way until 2020, to avoid the need to recalculate potentially millions of debts at a significant cost to Australia's social security system. Recalculation of debts would place significant burden on individuals and employers and would involve a significant diversion of resources, effecting Services Australia's ability to help Australians who need assistance now.

I recently met with the team at the Norwood branch of Services Australia, located in my electorate of Sturt. Led by Nico, that team includes several dedicated staff members who told me they had been working for Services Australia and its previous equivalence for over 30 years. They know the system, they know the customers and they know how to assist their customers to navigate the system. They know how to help vulnerable Australians in need and they are motivated to do it. Their time is best spent helping Australians who need that help now, and that is where this government wants their time to be dedicated. That is where Australians expect their time to be dedicated, including Australians like Carole and Kay, who are part of a Sturt based group called Grandmas for Action and who came to see me recently to talk about JobSeeker, which is another important part of the social safety net. I raise Carole and Kay because they are an example of Australians who, like the team at Services Australia at Norwood, care deeply about the welfare of their fellow Australians and who want a better, fairer and more equitable social safety net that provides effective support to people who need it. Carole and Kay understand that, when lightning strikes, a meaningful and accessible social safety net is critical.

In recognition of the fact that lightning sometimes strikes in unpredictable and cruel ways, the changes proposed by this bill also give Services Australia extended powers to waive social security debts that have been incurred because of coercion or financial abuse. What this means is, when considering a debt waiver, a Services Australia official will be able to consider all the circumstances that led to someone knowingly making a false statement to Services Australia or not complying with the law. This includes coercion or financial abuse, which are serious forms of family and domestic violence. This change directly responds to a recommendation of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse and further demonstrates the government's resolve on delivering on its commitment to support victims-survivors under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. It is also an important part of the government's commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems.

The Albanese Labor government believes in a strong social security system. This government will not disparage people for needing support, but we will make sure that we are achieving value for every dollar of taxpayer money spent. Australia's social safety net should be there for people when they need it, and this bill protects the integrity of Australia's social security system. I commend the bill to the House.

Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Too often in this place we talk about laws in the abstract—about frameworks, definitions and administration. But behind every line of law and, in particular, every line of social security law there's a real person, often someone in crisis: a woman leaving an abusive relationship, a single parent trying to rebuild—someone who has done everything right and is still falling through the cracks. That's why today I rise in support of this bill, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. I do so because, while many of its provisions may be technical, the real-world impacts are really human.

Over the past year I've written to two successive ministers for social services about one particular issue: how the government handles debts raised against victim-survivors of coercive control. Coercive control is a form of abuse that strips people of autonomy, including over their finances. A woman might be forced to sign documents, give false information or relinquish control of her Centrelink account, not by choice but out of fear. Under previous rules, even when Services Australia recognised that abuse had occurred, they often had no legal pathway to waive the resulting debt. It was cruel, it was bureaucratic and it was wrong.

I'm pleased that the government has taken action here and that the legislation takes action to fix that, giving Services Australia the authority to waive debts where false information was provided under coercive control or similar abuse. This change won't make headlines, but for those it effects it could mean everything. It sends a powerful message to victim-survivors: we believe you, we see you and we will not punish you for the harm done to you. I thank the government for listening to advocates, for responding to last year's inquiry into financial abuse and for making this change. This is well supported by many in my electorate, and this change is certainly one I'm very proud to have pushed for.

Another important shift in this legislation is about income apportionment. Again, it's an issue that sounds dry on paper but has a deeply frustrating and unjust impact on people who receive income support. Under the old system, some individuals had their payments reduced due to outdated income rules, even when they no longer had access to that income or it had already been recovered. This caused real stress and hardship. The changes in this bill right that wrong, and I commend the government for correcting it.

I would also like to briefly acknowledge that I'm moving a small amendment to this bill that will focus on improving the family and domestic violence crisis payment. This is a payment designed for moments of real, urgent need, but too many people are missing out on it because they don't tick the right box or they find out too late that they're eligible for it or they're told that their temporary accommodation doesn't qualify as a home. My amendment would extend the claim period, broaden the definition of 'residence' and remove a redundant requirement that makes someone prove that they're establishing a new home. These are all changes aimed at making the payment more accessible, more compassionate and more fit for purpose. This is about making sure that, in a moment of trauma, people are met with help, not hurdles.

We live in a country where the social safety net is a lifeline for millions. That net must be sturdy, it must be just and it must evolve when it falls short. This bill does not overhaul the system, but it does improve it. It strengthens the threads of our safety net. For those few Australians who will be directly impacted by the changes—victim-survivors, single parents, people in crisis—it could be the difference between despair and a path forward. That is why I support the bill, and I commend it to the House.

Sarah Witty (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to contribute to the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. With this bill, the Albanese Labor government is delivering a fairer, more efficient and more compassionate social security system.

This bill builds on what Labor have already delivered to strengthen our social safety net. Since we came to government we have raised JobSeeker by almost $4,000 a year, giving people looking for work a better chance to get by. We have lifted the pension by almost $5,000 a year for a single person, giving older Australians more security in retirement. We have boosted rent assistance by almost 15 per cent to help ease the pressure of rising rents, and we are delivering paid parental leave with super so families are almost $12,000 better off for every child.

This bill is another important step in that record. It shows Labor is building a system that helps people when they need it most. One of these changes, which support Australians, is the end of the use of external debt collection agencies. Many of us here are privileged in that we have never had to experience what it feels like to be chased by a debt collector. We have not had to know that gut-wrenching feeling when the phone rings from a private number—not knowing if it's a debt collector, a job offer or a call from your doctor. You live your life gambling on whether someone will leave a voicemail. That constant fear strips people of their dignity as they try to pick themselves up after the safety net has caught them. On top of that is the stress of having to ask for help in the first place and the crushing worry of not knowing how you'll ever pay that back. The last thing people deserve is to be hounded and shamed by a system that is meant to support them.

This legislation reforms how we manage social security debts, resolves the longstanding issue of income apportionment and makes the system work for people instead of against them. For many of us, at some point in our lives, there will be a need to access the social security system. It might be because of illness, the loss of a job, caring for children or older relatives, or simply trying to get through a tough period. It is unfortunate that there have been times when people who have turned to the system in good faith have been left carrying the stress of debts—debts that were small, accidental or calculated under flawed rules, as we have seen with robodebt.

This bill will wipe almost half of Australia's undetermined social security debt backlog and, importantly, will establish a resolution scheme offering payments of up to $600 for those who were impacted by the historical method known as income apportionment. This is fairness in action, this is efficiency in action, and this is Labor putting people back at the heart of government.

One of the most important changes in this bill is the increase in the threshold for waiving small debts. This is the first increase in more than 30 years. The current threshold is just $50, and it has not changed since the 1990s even though government payments have tripled since then. What we considered small in 1993 is not what small means today. By lifting the waiver threshold to $250 we are ensuring Services Australia does not waste time and money chasing debts that cost more to recover than they are worth. Around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived or never raised in 2025-26 as a result.

There are two important details about this change. First, the new threshold will not just rise once and then fall behind. For the first time, it will be indexed every year in July with inflation to keep pace with the real cost of living. Second, strong safeguards will remain. If someone tries to game the system by deliberately racking up small debts, those debts will not just be wiped away; this is about fairness, not loopholes.

We must never forget the damage of robodebt. Robodebt was unlawful, it was cruel, and it left hundreds of thousands of Australians carrying debts they did not owe. The royal commission exposed just how badly people were treated. Labor has either accepted or accepted in principle all 56 recommendations of that commission; three-quarters of them are already done or well underway. This bill is part of that work. It makes sure debts are handled properly, with fairness, safeguards and humanity. Unlike those opposite, we will never repeat the mistakes of robodebt.

This change will save resources, but, even more importantly, it will spare Australians who are already doing it tough the significant stress of being hounded over tiny accidental debts. I would like to take a moment to speak about what this means for a woman, and in particular women who have been pushed to the margins. When I was the CEO of the Nappy Collective, I saw up close how families—and overwhelmingly women—were making impossible choices. Women escaping family violence would come to us for nappies because they had nothing left after rent, bills and putting food on the table. I will never forget a mother who told me that, to save money, her only option was to change nappies only for number twos and how receiving a Centrelink debt notice on top of that pressure filled her with fear about how she could ever possibly pay it back. This mother was not irresponsible. She was not careless. She was a survivor, trying to hold her family together with whatever she had. This government, by raising the small debt waiver threshold, is sparing women in these situations the unnecessary trauma of being told they owe their government $50 or $100—sums that might mean nappies for the month or groceries for the week.

This bill also makes critical changes to ensure the social security system cannot be weaponised against victims-survivors of coercion and financial abuse. Financial abuse is one of the most menacing forms of family violence. It strips people of their independence. It traps them in unsafe relationships. Imagine a woman being physically abused by her partner and forced to sign forms she does not understand. Imagine that woman taking the brave but difficult decision to escape that violence, only to be faced with a debt in her name. Her partner's control lingers even after the violence has stopped.

For women from migrant and refugee backgrounds, this can be even harder. What happens if you cannot read English and you are too afraid to ask how the system works? You are left relying on someone who can easily take advantage of you. And what if you're afraid of authority? That fear can silence you and leave you carrying debts that were never really yours. Too many women who came here for safety have found themselves trapped again, this time by debts they never chose and cannot pay. When you do not know how you are going to pay for your groceries, it's very hard to think about making a move to safety. You worry about how you will pay the rent and how you can get the support you need, and in those moments even a small debt can feel like a wall you just cannot get past.

That is why this bill is so important. It means Services Australia will be able to wipe debts that come from coercion or abuse so women and children are not punished for the actions of an abuser. Until now, the system has punished victims of that abuse. With this bill, Services Australia will have the power to waive debt where coercion or abuse played a role. That means no-one will be forced to carry a debt because their abuser manipulated them into signing a form or pressured them into providing false information. This responds directly to the recommendations of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse, and it is a critical step under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. This is not just good policy; it's a moral responsibility.

I want to turn to the longstanding issues of income apportionment. From 1991 until 2020, income apportionment was used to calculate debts for people on social security who also earned income from employment. In situations where the exact daily earnings were not clear, income was spread across multiple Centrelink fortnights. We know these practices were inconsistent with the law. While they have never been used by the Albanese Labor government, the fact remains that people were impacted by debt for decades.

The government could attempt to reopen millions of debts, some going back 20 or 30 years, but that would cause untold distress, uncertainty and expense. Many of these debts have been repaid years ago. People have moved on with their lives. Instead we are fixing the law on income apportionment and creating a resolution scheme so people who were affected can be compensated. People with historical debts that happened between 2003 and 2020 will be entitled to a resolution payment of up to $600. If their debt was under $200, they will receive the full amount back; for debts between $200 and $2,000, the payment will be $200; between $2,000 and $5,000, the payment will be $400; and, for debts above $5,000, the payment will be $600. This is a fair and caring way to finally put the issue to rest.

In my electorate of Melbourne, these reforms will make a real difference. Melbourne is a city of creativity, resilience and diversity, but it is also a city where hardship sits alongside wealth. I hear from single parents trying to re-enter the workforce while raising their children. I am reminded of Kathy, a single mum who, like many others, is retraining through TAFE so she can build a more secure future for herself and her children. At the same time, she is holding down casual shifts to make ends meet and to give her kids those small extras that matter so much, like a costume for book week. When working casual hours, income goes up and down, and that can be where debt errors have so often crept in. What should be a step towards stability, studying, working or raising a family can end in an unexpected debt that leaves people with more stress and more uncertainty.

In Carlton and Fitzroy, students juggling study and part-time work tell me how hard it is to keep on top of their obligations when their working hours change without notice. Melbourne has the highest number of people receiving student debt relief through the HECS system, and that is no coincidence. This bill, alongside HECS debt relief, shows the government is serious about removing barriers that hold young people back and about giving them a fair chance to build their future.

I also think of the stories I've heard from migrant support workers of new arrivals trying to get their first job in Australia, often in insecure work like hospitality or cleaning. For them an unexpected Centrelink debt can be overwhelming, especially when they are still learning how our system works and do not have the same networks of support to fall back on. And we know insecure work hits youngest people hardest. The Young Workers Centre in Melbourne has been clear about how casualisation and underemployment leave young workers vulnerable with little financial buffer when mistakes or debt arise. This bill recognises that reality. It acknowledges those struggles, and it changes the system so it supports people instead of punishing them.

Australia deserves a social security system that is fair, efficient and humane—a system that reflects modern realities not outdated thresholds, a system that protects victims-survivors not perpetrators and a system that offers solutions not distress. That is what this bill delivers. In doing so, it shows once again that the government stands with the Australian people who, for whatever reason, rely on social security to live with dignity, security and hope. I commend the bill to the House.

Jodie Belyea (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today in strong support of the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No.2) Bill 2025. It is a long-overdue reform package that will bring greater fairness, clarity and compassion to the way we manage social security debt in Australia. With this bill the Albanese Labor government is delivering on its commitment to create a fairer and more efficient social security system—one that does not punish people unfairly, one that acknowledges past administrative errors and one that recognises the real-world complexities Australians face in their everyday lives. This bill delivers three reforms: it resolves the longstanding issue of income apportionment, it improves debt management through increased small debt waivers and it strengthens protections for victims-survivors through special circumstances debt waivers, particularly in cases of financial abuse and coercive control.

One of the most significant and longstanding issues this bill addresses is income apportionment. Between 1991 and 2020 Services Australia used a method known as income apportionment to determine eligibility and debt levels for income support recipients who also earn wages. When pay slips did not show clear daily earnings, officials distributed that income across multiple Centrelink fortnights to estimate the entitlement. While this approach may have been well intentioned at the time, the full Federal Court's decision in the Chaplin case made it clear that the practice was inconsistent with the legislation as it stood. It was, simply put, legally flawed. The Albanese Labor government has never used income apportionment, but, as the government responsible for restoring integrity to our social security system, we are taking decisive action to correct this legacy issue fairly, transparently and compassionately.

This bill will retrospectively validate the practice of income apportionment, not to conceal past mistakes but to prevent the reopening of millions of old cases, many of which are decades old and already repaid. Recalculating these debts would cause unnecessary distress, create administrative chaos and divert vital resources away from frontline services that Australians rely on today.

To ensure fairness, the bill also establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme, recognising that some Australians may have repaid debts that were incorrectly calculated and deserve to be compensated. The scheme will cover debts incurred from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020, the period when income apportionment was most clearly inconsistent with the law. Affected individuals will be eligible for a resolution payment of up to $600, depending on the size of their debt. Applications are expected to open from January 2026, once this legislation is passed. To assist people through this process, Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS will each receive $400,000 in funding to provide support and guidance.

The scale of this reform cannot be understated. Around 5.5 million debts, held by approximately three million Australians and valued at $4.4 billion, may have been impacted by income apportionment. Because of limitations in historical records, identifying each case individually would be impossible without immense cost and distress. This legislation provides a fair, practical and compassionate way forward, acknowledging the flaws of the past, offering meaningful redress and ensuring legal certainty into the future.

The second major reform in this bill brings long-overdue common sense and fairness to the way we handle small debts. The current small debt waiver threshold, as low as $50, has not changed since the early 1990s. At that time, social security payments were significantly lower. Since then, those payments have tripled in value, yet the definition of 'small debt' has remained frozen in time. This bill will raise the small debt waiver threshold to $250, establishing a single, standardised limit that replaces the current fragmented range of $50 to $200. Importantly, it will also be indexed annually in July in line with the consumer price index, ensuring that the threshold keeps pace with modern economic realities.

This is not just a technical change; it is a reform that will make a real difference in people's lives. In my community of Dunkley, many constituents have shared their experience of being pursued over small but stressful debts—debts that often arose through honest mistakes and cost more to recover than they were worth. This reform will mean that, in 2025-26, around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived or never raised. Nearly half of the existing backlog of undetermined debts will be cleared, and public resources will be redirected to supporting people, not chasing trivial amounts.

We are not abandoning fiscal responsibility; we are strengthening it. Existing fraud safeguards remain firmly in place, but we are also recognising that most Australians engage with the social security system in good faith and that small administrative errors should not result in unnecessary hardship. This reform restores proportion, fairness and dignity to the system.

The third reform is the most personally significant for many Australians. This bill strengthens the special circumstances debt waiver, empowering Services Australia to waive debts incurred as a result of financial abuse, coercion or family and domestic violence—an issue that goes to the heart of some of the experiences of many families, women and children in Dunkley.

Before entering parliament, I worked for 15 years in domestic and family violence services with Anglicare and Family Life in south-east Victoria. I met women who could not leave abusive relationships because they were financially trapped. I met women who stayed because they simply did not have the means to support both themselves and their children. Financial abuse and coercive control are not abstract concepts; they are deliberate, devastating forms of manipulation and control designed to trap, punish and disempower.

In many cases, victims-survivors have been forced to provide false information to Services Australia under threat or intimidation. Until now, they were still held responsible for those debts even though the actions were not truly their own. This bill changes that. It empowers decision-makers to consider the full circumstances that led to a person's situation, including whether they were acting under coercion or control.

This reform delivers on our election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems, implements key recommendations from the 2024 for parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse, and supports the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032. Let me be absolutely clear: victims-survivors should never be held accountable for debts incurred through abuse. This bill enshrines that principle in law. And while this is a major step forward, our work does not end there. The government is continuing to consult on future reforms to ensure that perpetrators, not victims-survivors, are held financially accountable for debts that arise from abuse.

The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 is a landmark reform, one that restores fairness, integrity and compassion to our social service security system. It delivers clarity and compensation through the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme, fairness through a modernised small debt waiver system, and protection and justice for victims-survivors of financial abuse. This bill reflects the values that underpin good government: integrity, fairness, compassion and responsibility. It recognises past mistakes, strengthens future processes and puts people, not bureaucracy, at the heart of social security policy. This is a good policy, it is fair policy and it is the right policy. I commend the bill to the House.

Kara Cook (Bonner, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I speak to the technical elements of the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, I want to begin by sharing the stories of some of the incredibly brave women I had the privilege of representing in my previous work as a domestic violence lawyer for more than 10 years. These women did not have bruises that were visible to the public. Their injuries were inflicted silently, through control, isolation and economic manipulation. They suffered coercive control and financial abuse in homes that were meant to be their sanctuaries.

One woman I represented lived in a home where every door and cupboard had a lock. Her partner wore the only key around his neck. If she wanted to access food, medicine or her children's clothing, she had to ask permission. Her autonomy was reduced to a request, her life controlled room by room, cupboard by cupboard. Another woman had to survive on a jar of coins. Her partner would give her a weekly allowance of a few coins to feed the family, and if she disobeyed him in any way that jar remained closed.

I also represented a senior executive, a highly accomplished woman, who was forced to deposit her entire salary into her partner's account each and every week. He demanded to see her payslips and receipts. If she failed to provide evidence of her earnings, or spent money without permission, there were consequences. Another woman was tracked electronically in real time. Each time she made a transaction, her partner was notified. If he didn't agree with the purchase, he would demand she return it immediately. That was regardless of whether it was cold goods to feed their family or clothing for their children.

These are not isolated cases. They are part of a pattern of abuse that is sophisticated, sustained and deeply gendered. Too often these forms of control are either misunderstood or invisible, especially within our systems of government. These are all examples of coercive control, domestic violence and financial abuse. These stories are one of the many reasons I rise today to strongly support this bill. This bill is about more than numbers or technicalities. It's about people and it's about providing safety and justice.

This legislation may appear administrative in nature, but make no mistake: its real impact lies in how it will change lives. It recognises that our social security system, while essential, has also at times failed to protect those it was designed to serve. For too long, coercive and controlling partners have weaponised this very system against women, often leaving them with debts they never knew existed or punishing them for seeking help. This bill introduces new powers for Services Australia to take into account coercion and financial abuse when deciding whether a social security debt should be waived.

Financial abuse is one of the most insidious tools used by perpetrators of domestic and family violence. It is used to entrap women and to make them feel that leaving isn't possible, that they can't survive on their own, that the very institutions designed to support them will penalise them if they try. This bill says to survivors: we see you. It says to perpetrators: you will not hide behind government systems to control and cause further harm. It empowers officials to consider all the circumstances of a debt—not just whether a false statement was made, but why it was made—whether it was made under threat, under coercion, under the shadow of control. Crucially, it ensures that survivors like Ashley will finally be eligible for justice.

Ashley was under psychiatric care, navigating the trauma of domestic violence. Her partner, acting as her nominee, falsely declared their income, resulting in a $7,000 debt in Ashley's name. Under current rules, because her partner knowingly underreported the income, Ashley was denied a waiver. This bill changes that. It ensures that officials can look at the broader circumstances, including abuse, and provide justice. That is what safety in legislation looks like.

In my career I have sat across from women who believed they were to blame—women who cried not because they had no money but because they had no control, women who felt invisible to the system—and I've seen how small changes and big changes in law can have a monumental impact on their lives. We have seen this in recent years through the monumental amendments to the Family Law Act and we see it here again today. What we do here in this chamber matters. This bill will offer women like the ones I've described a pathway forward. It restores dignity and it restores justice, and in some cases it may save lives.

Beyond financial abuse, the bill delivers broader reforms that support the integrity and efficiency of our social security system. It raises the debt waiver threshold to $250 for the first time in 30 years. This means 1.2 million small debts, many outdated and uneconomical to pursue, will be wiped. It improves debt waiver rules, ensuring that those engaging in good faith aren't penalised while still preventing exploitation of the system. It also supports the debt resolution scheme, offering up to $600 for those affected by historical income apportionment errors between 2003 and 2020. It also protects frontline services by allowing Services Australia staff to focus on helping those in need, rather than chasing minor or unjust debts. It's a modern, compassionate approach to welfare administration, not a punitive one.

Since coming to office, the Albanese Labor government has made real investments in social security, including raising the rate of Jobseeker and the age pension; expanding Commonwealth rent assistance; increasing paid parental leave to 26 weeks by 2026, with superannuation included; and changing the parenting payment single arrangements to support single parents, the very people who face the most significant financial stress when escaping violence. These reforms have helped thousands of people in my electorate of Bonner and millions more across Australia, and this bill builds on that process.

What is the alternative in this circumstance from those on the other side? Through you, Deputy Speaker Young, I ask those opposite: what would their cuts to 41,000 public servants have meant for the women I just spoke about? Would they have received the help they needed to flee violence, feed their children or access justice? Would Ashley have seen her case reviewed? Would the woman with the locked cupboards have been supported? Or would they have faced longer delays, colder bureaucracy and a system unable or unwilling to understand their trauma, like we saw through robodebt?

This bill is part of a broader, whole-of-government approach to combat violence against women and children, including $4 billion in investments to end gender based violence; 10 days of paid domestic violence leave, and today marks the anniversary of that becoming law; the permanent Leaving Violence Program; funding for housing and legal supports, including our record investment in the National Legal Assistance Partnership, supporting many community legal centres and also our legal aid commissions, who provide services to those seeking to navigate the very complex system that is social security; and a national audit of Commonwealth systems to stop perpetrators from weaponising them. This is what systemic reform looks like.

There is no dignity in being trapped by someone you love. There is no justice in being punished by the very system you turn to for help. This bill is technical in name but transformational in impact. It gives people a fighting chance and says clearly, 'We will no longer allow abusers to use the social security system as another tool of control.' As a former domestic violence lawyer, as a member of parliament and as someone committed to a fair and just society, I will always fight for those who feel unseen, unheard and unsupported. I am proud to share their stories today so that they can be heard by all of Australia. This bill delivers on our promise to do better for the most vulnerable in our community, and I commend the bill to the House.

Gabriel Ng (Menzies, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese Labor government is committed to delivering a fairer, more efficient social security system that Australians can trust. After years of neglect from those opposite, it has fallen to this government to take on this important task—repairing a system that has too often failed the people it was meant to support. We believe in a strong and reliable social safety net—a key to Labor's values and a key to a fair society. It is there for all of us at different times in our lives, and its integrity must be protected so it continues to serve Australians who are doing it tough. This bill is a step in rebuilding trust. It reforms the way we manage social security system debts to ensure greater fairness, transparency and accountability. By putting in place a more robust framework, we can restore community confidence in the system and make sure people know it operates with integrity and compassion.

Importantly, this legislation also addresses a deeply troubling issue. As the member for Bonner so eloquently put it, based on her experience as a family violence lawyer, financial abuse that occurs within the contexts of domestic and family violence is a scourge that is too often enacted using our social security system. Too often, perpetrators exploit the payment systems to exert control and harm. These reforms will ensure that our social security system is no longer a tool for abuse but a source of support for those who need it most. This bill reflects our commitment to a social safety net that is fair, humane and worthy of the trust the Australian people place in it.

In my first speech in this place, I spoke about the former coalition government's betrayal of the Australian people through robodebt. Vulnerable Australians were relentlessly harassed by the former government for debts they did not owe—debts that had been inaccurately and illegally calculated. This was not simply a failure of administration; it was a profound moral failure. It showed contempt for vulnerable Australians and revealed the ultimate consequences of a public service that had been hollowed out by years of neoliberal ideology and cronyism. The damage caused by robodebt was clear for all to see. In some heartbreaking cases, the unjust harassment and pressure were so severe that it led to people taking their lives. Families were left grieving. People who turned to the social safety net in their time of need were made to feel like criminals. Its impact on public faith and confidence in our social security system cannot be overstated.

That is why this government has been so committed to rebuilding the system and restoring trust and fairness. We know that a functional social safety net is a cornerstone of a decent and compassionate society. That is why the Albanese Labor government established the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme—to get to the truth of what happened, to give a voice to those harmed and to make sure this never happens again. We have accepted or accepted in principle all 56 recommendations made to government. That work is ongoing. It will continue to drive meaningful changes to how we manage social security payments and debts in Australia. We know that it takes a Labor government to put people back at the centre of our government services. It is what we were elected to do. This legislation demonstrates that commitment clearly, and it builds on the work we did throughout our first term in government to restore integrity to our public services, rebuild capability in the public sector and ensure decisions are made in the public interest.

Recently I had the pleasure of visiting a Services Australia office in Box Hill, in Menzies, with the Assistant Minister for the Public Service, Patrick Gorman. There we met dedicated, expert staff who support the public to gain access to essential government services. As a former public servant, I greatly appreciated the time Assistant Minister Gorman took with the staff, thanking them for their service and recognising the essential work they do. One of these staff members had been working as labour hire but was given a permanent APS job under this government. She spoke about her relief at having secure work—of the certainty, stability and ability to plan for the future that this provided. I was also pleased to see that staff from the NDIS were co-located with Centrelink staff. Often people seeking help from the government will be facing multiple issues. The truth is that government services can be siloed or a bureaucratic labyrinth. Co-location is one way we can not only better use government resources but also create a better experience for those seeking to engage government assistance.

The actions of this government stand in stark contrast to the coalition. Those opposite will always argue for smaller government and outsourcing of critical services. They show their contempt for the Public Service with arbitrary staffing caps and, at the last election, a cut of 41,000 positions. This had nothing to do with the job that needed to be done and everything to do with neoliberal ideology. Outsourcing is not only worse for workers; it is inefficient. It means higher staff turnover, a failure to develop institutional expertise and less secure jobs for those doing essential services.

For Australians, hollowing out the Public Service comes as at a cost. It is a cost borne by the most vulnerable in our communities. This legislation is another step in rebuilding trust, strengthening fairness and ensuring government services are delivered with the dignity and respect that every Australian deserves. This government has made the investments to make sure our service system works for the Australians who need it. We have taken necessary steps to improve the way our social security system functions so that it is fair, efficient and centred on people. This has included recruiting around 3,000 more frontline staff, like the staff that I met at Services Australia in Box Hill, to improve access to services and reduce pressure on existing workers.

We've reduced call wait time at Services Australia so that Australians can reach the help they need faster. We have lifted claims processing rates, which means more money is getting back into families' pockets. We've ended the use of external debt collection agencies by government, bringing this work back under proper oversight. We've engaged community legal services to support vulnerable people who may have debts and need advice and advocacy, and we've increased payments and improved accuracy so that Australians receive the support they are entitled to. These changes have made a real difference. This bill builds on this record and takes the next step in establishing a more efficient social security system.

We know that Australians generally engage with the social security system in good faith. The overwhelming majority of people who rely on this support do the right thing. It should be acknowledged there are significant administrative costs involved in chasing and recovering very small debts, which often outweigh the value of the debts themselves. That is why we are increasing the threshold for small debts for the first time in over 30 years, lifting it from $50 to $250. This change will make a substantial impact. This will waive around 1.2 million debts that would have been raised in the 2025-26 financial year. It's a commonsense reform; it will save time, it will reduce the administrative burden and it will allow Services Australia staff to focus on things that matter most. By increasing this threshold we are making the system more efficient and productive, but we are still maintaining appropriate safeguards to protect against fraudulent activity. The change strikes the right balance between fiscal responsibility and fairness to the people who use the system.

We remain firmly committed to ensuring that our social security services focus on preventing serious systems abuse. Family and domestic violence can be complex and corrosive in the way it is perpetrated. When I was volunteering at community legal centres and working as a judge's associate at the courts, I saw firsthand the epidemic of family violence and systems abuse. As the member for Bonner put it so well, family violence is not just about physical abuse. It is about coercive control. It is about financial abuse. It can be about systems abuse, dragging people through the courts to continue to exert control on them. And it can also be about accruing debts to enact harm on people—harm that lasts for months and years, as people are unable to gain financial independence. This economic abuse plays a major role in the broader picture of abuse, particularly in cases of intimate partner violence.

Sadly, our social services system has not been exempt from being used as a tool of financial abuse. The weaponisation of debt through the payment system is one of those tools perpetrators have used to maintain power and control. This bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems and ensures that our social security system cannot be weaponised against victims-survivors. This legislation will enable Services Australia staff, when considering a debt waiver, to consider all the circumstances that led to someone knowingly making a false statement to the government. This will include consideration of evidence of financial abuse and coercive control. This will help ensure that systems abuse can no longer be used by perpetrators.

While there is still more work to do to make sure all our government service systems act as a firewall against such abuse, this bill is an important step in the right direction. Ending family and domestic violence will mean pulling on every lever available to us to create a culture that promotes safety and financial security for all. It will continue the work of reform, particularly as it relates to the tax and social security systems, so that victims are not responsible for the debts that perpetrators accrue. I am proud to be part of a Labor government that is focused on doing the work of preventing and responding to family violence at every level, including through the introduction of this bill.

Historically, income apportionment has been used to determine social security debts. This is not a practice that the Albanese Labor government has ever used. This bill provides legal clarity around this historical practice and, importantly, establishes the income appropriate resolution scheme. This means that this scheme will offer redress for those who were unfairly affected by this practice. People with historical debts potentially affected by income apportionment between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 will be eligible to apply for a resolution payment of up to $600. These payments recognise that this practice was invalid. They also recognise the need to deal with the legacy of this practice and to create a pathway for people to seek compensation if they were impacted by this practice. This scheme recognises the importance of balancing our support of vulnerable Australians with ensuring taxpayers' money is spent effectively and efficiently. It reaffirms our commitment to a robust social safety net that looks after people and is sustainable for generations to come.

This bill is a significant step in our ongoing work to restore integrity to the social security system, to restore the strength of the Public Service and to protect families from domestic and family violence in the form of financial abuse. It ensures the mistakes of the past are addressed while embedding fairness and accountability in future practice. It is about fairness. It's about humanity and dignity within the practices of our payment arrangements. It is also about rebuilding trust with the Australian people, who rightly expect public services to act in their best interests and in good faith. Restoring that confidence will not happen overnight. It will only happen under a Labor government doing the work to invest back in these frontline services.

These are reforms that will affect millions of Australians. They mean our social security system will work for those who need it most, well into the future. I commend this bill to the House.

Madonna Jarrett (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of this bill, Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. Like many in the Brisbane community, I had grandparents and, now, another family member who relied on the economic support of the government to survive. They were hardworking. They paid their taxes. They contributed to society and to our economy. They looked after their neighbours. One had a terrible illness in the prime of their life that left them as a paraplegic, amongst other complications. They were a fit, outdoor blue-collar worker. The illness happened through no fault of their own. As for many, sometimes life just happens. They now rely on government payment support because they have to; their ability to work and earn a living is gone.

I tell this story because this is the primary purpose of social security: to provide economic and social wellbeing by creating a safety net for individuals and families who cannot fully support themselves due to age, disability, unemployment or other circumstances. Our social security system is something to be really proud of. It's a system that goes to our values as a government: no-one held back and no-one left behind. It is part of our identity and how we view ourselves as a nation—one that helps those when they need help the most. This is at the heart of why I am in this House. They are the values I live by. These are Labor values.

In Australia, the concept of social security was first introduced in 1908, when the Commonwealth parliament passed the Invalid and Old Age Pension Act. It provided financial support to the elderly and the ill. It followed the economic depression of the early 1890s, when poverty was widespread and the idea of who should support those unable to look after themselves was a big topic of debate. In the 1940s, Labor Prime Minister Curtin announced the development of a national welfare scheme, including sickness and unemployment benefits. Then, building on his legacy, the post-war Chifley government held the social services referendum—again, a Labor government. This allowed a change to the Constitution which granted the Commonwealth power to legislate for a wide range of social services, and these changes laid the foundations for the modern social security system we have in this country today.

This Labor government continues the fundamental principles underpinning social security, providing a safety net when people need it the most. We are also committed to a fairer and more efficient social security system. This bill does just that. This legislation is the government's response to the full Federal Court Chaplin case, which established beyond doubt that income apportionment was unlawful. We've heard a bit about that today. Income apportionment was the method used by Services Australia to calculate social security debts between the early 1990s and 2020. It involved using evidence from the individual, such as payslips, to determine their entitlement to a social security payment. That was also used as part of calculating debt. Where it wasn't clear what a person's exact daily earnings were, the employment income could be apportioned over two or more Centrelink fortnights. This practice is now understood to have been inconsistent with legislative provisions at the time. Just to be clear, this government has never used this practice, but, under the scheme, debt had accrued to some Australians.

If debt is reopened in this fashion, it will cause a number of issues. First, it would cause distress, delay and uncertainty for people with debt. Second, in some cases, debts are decades old and some have been repaid where maybe they might not have been correctly calculated. Third, it would also divert critical government resources from frontline services that help people who need support now. So this legislation avoids the need to recalculate potentially millions of debts, at a significant cost to the Australian social security system. That is why we are legislating also to put the historical practice of income apportionment on clearer legal footing. This bill will wipe out almost half of Australia's undetermined social security debt backlog. It's anticipated that, as a result, around 1.2 million undetermined debts are expected to be waived or not raised in 2025-26. We will establish a scheme also to roll out resolution payments for those impacted by income apportionment.

This bill will also increase the threshold for waiving small debts for the first time in over 30 years. It'll change from $50 to $250. Since 1990, that's a long time for something not to change. That small debt waiver amount has not kept pace with the value of government payments, which have tripled since 1993, and it no longer reflects what a small debt means to many people today. As has been mentioned in this House earlier, often the administrative cost of recouping small debts is higher than the value of the debt itself, making the process of debt recovery uneconomical. The changes in this bill will mean Services Australia does not waste time or resources chasing small debts, and they will spare Australians significant stress, particularly those who have accidental debts. Setting the threshold at $250 recognises people generally engage with the social security system in good faith while continuing to ensure responsible fiscal management.

This bill will also protect Australians who are subject to financial abuse and coercive control, which, as we all know, are predominantly women. As part of our election commitment, we committed to embed safety in Commonwealth systems. The government is legislating changes to better protect victims-survivors and prevent the social security system being weaponised against them. Financial abuse—as we heard from the member for Bonner—and coercive control are serious forms of family and domestic violence. The changes delivered through this bill will give Services Australia extended powers to waive social security debts that have been incurred as a result of coercion or financial abuse. What this means is that, when considering a debt waiver, a Services Australia official will be able to take into account all the circumstances that led to somebody knowingly making false statements to Services Australia or not complying with the law, and this includes coercion or financial abuse. This change directly responds to a recommendation of the 2024 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry into financial abuse. It also demonstrates the government's resolve in delivering on its commitment to support victims-survivors under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032.

But, as I said before, we know this is a first step. The government is doing more to address financial abuse, including consulting on changes to tax and social security laws so perpetrators, not victims-survivors, are accountable for debts they accrue through financial abuse. We know that financial abuse is one of the most powerful tools perpetrators use to trap women and children. That's very sad. These changes are about putting control back in the hands of victims-survivors, removing unnecessary harm and making sure our system supports safety and dignity.

To compensate people with potentially affected debts, the bill establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. Through this scheme, people with historical debts potentially affected by income apportionment from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020 will be eligible to apply for a resolution payment. This is in recognition of the fact that we know this method of calculating entitlement was invalid. To assist those affected to navigate the resolution scheme, Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service will each be given $400,000 in funding. The amount of compensation available will be based on a person's determined debt, with resolution payment amounts up to $600. The Minister for Social Services recently also announced a new $300 million package to support this reform. Further details on how and where to apply for compensation will be available following the passage of the legislation.

This bill really is an important step towards social security debt reform. It's important to note that, when issues are identified within a system, action is taken by this government to ensure that there is public confidence in that system. That's really important given what we've gone through over the last decade. This approach is quite opposite to the recent robodebt scandal, which was overseen by those opposite. Work was recently undertaken by the Attorney-General where an historic agreement to settle the Knox v Commonwealth class action was reached. This was an appeal from the original robodebt class action settlement in 2020. In the Attorney-General's own words:

When the unfairness, the illegality and the cruelty of robodebt became apparent, the approach of those opposite was to double down, to go on the attack against those who complained and to maintain the falsehood that in fact the system had not changed at all. But, when this government—

the Labor government—

came to office, we—

took swift action and—

established a royal commission which heard tragic stories of people being hounded by their own government to repay debts they did not even owe. None of us should forget—

I will never forget—

former minister Alan Tudge saying to vulnerable Australians, 'We'll find you, we'll track you down, you will have to repay those debts, and you may end up in prison.'

Is this how we treat some of the most vulnerable people living in our society? This goes to the true character of those opposite. It is a Labor government that cares about people. The Attorney-General said:

The royal commission's findings were damning. Commissioner Holmes found that robodebt was 'a crude and cruel mechanism, neither fair nor legal' and 'a costly failure of public administration, in both human and economic terms'

On this side of the House, we believe in strong social security which helps our fellow Australians, including those in my community in Brisbane, when they need it the most, whether that's a local pensioner who receives the age pension—someone who has worked hard their entire life and has now reached retirement age but cannot fully support themselves financially—or a local student under the age of 25 who might be studying or training at TAFE or university and is receiving youth allowance. Maybe it's a dedicated carer receiving a carers payment and providing critical support to those who cannot support themselves. Maybe it's a single parent who is receiving the single parenting payment and who is the main carer for a young child. Maybe it's simply income support for a jobseeker, for someone who is looking for work, who may be sick or cannot work.

In Australia, our values are based on respect, fairness and equal opportunity, and these values go to the heart of why we have a social security in this country that is designed the way it is. It recognises the inherent human right to a decent standard of living and helps individuals live with dignity, free from excessive hardship. It provides a sense of security and stability, ensuring that people's living standards are not drastically eroded by unpredictable social or economic events.

By providing a safety net, social security aims to prevent social exclusion and promote social inclusion. It enables people to participate in society. Social security not only addresses the needs as they arise but also works to prevent risks and help individuals and families adjust to unavoidable disadvantages. The people in my Brisbane community benefit from social security, as do millions of Australians, and this bill supports and makes our social security system more robust, stronger and fairer. I commend the bill to the House.

Ash Ambihaipahar (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to speak about this piece of legislation, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, that cuts to the very heart of fairness in our social security system. For way too long, the rules that govern how debts are raised and managed have been outdated, inefficient and, at times, downright unfair. This bill before the House finally begins to put that right.

I come to this debate not only as a member for Barton but as someone who spent more than a decade in the law, advocating for people who were often up against systems that were stacked against them. For many people that find themselves relying on social security payments, the system can either be a bridge to a new life and a bright future or a bureaucratic barrier that keeps them trapped. I can tell you, when a person feels like they're being buried in red tape, when they've been hit with a debt they don't understand, when they are made to feel like a criminal for a simple mistake, that is not just a policy failure; that is a failure of justice.

This bill delivers a long-overdue reform. It brings compassion, common sense and accountability back to the way we treat people who rely on our social security system. We want the system to be a bridge, not a barrier. That's why we've introduced this bill into the House. Firstly, this bill amends the small debt waiver threshold. The small debt waiver is a legal mechanism under the Social Security Act that allows the government to forgive certain low-value debts owed by welfare recipients where it's not cost-effective for the Commonwealth to take action to recover them.

For 30 years, the so-called small debt waiver has been frozen. It's current range is $50 to $200—$50, unchanged since the 1990s, when the average cost of rent or a grocery bill looked nothing like it does today. In 2025, a small debt of $50 is insulting. It doesn't reflect the real world. This so-called small debt is no longer a reflection of what 'small debt' means to people today. To put it in plain language: this threshold was set when petrol was under 70c a litre, the median rent in Sydney was around $170 per week, and power prices were half of what they are now. Times have changed. Our welfare system must keep up with them. The administrative costs of chasing a $150 debt often exceeds the debt itself, which means taxpayers lose too. This reform is not about leniency. It's about efficiency, compassion and common sense. This bill increases the waiver threshold to $250. That means approximately 1.2 million debts, many of which would be impossible to recover without spending more taxpayer money in administration than the debts themselves. It will simply not be raised. This is the right outcome.

Economic Justice Australia, the peak advocacy organisation for community legal centres that assists people with Services Australia, calls this reform 'a game changer that removes a lot of unnecessary stress from people's lives'. Indeed, these are people that are already vulnerable and experiencing hardship. People on income support are more likely to live under or near the poverty line. These same people have often accrued debt because of systemic overpayment or miscalculation issues—that is, through no fault of their own. We're talking about young people from rough families, single parents or Australians who have a disability. These are the people most likely to be receiving these payments and thus receiving debts in the first place.

For many of these people, the myGov email landing in their inbox isn't just a notification; it's sometimes a heavy pit in their stomach. That notification of a debt means a complete recalculation of their budget, where their next meal is going to come from or how the already-overdue bill is going to be paid. We also know that Services Australia can be very difficult to navigate for people without in-depth experience of government and its procedures. I'm not saying these procedures are out of place; we should be strict on the paperwork required to receive payments from Services Australia and the checks and balances that come along with it. But, for someone already experiencing disadvantage, with low computer literacy skills, escaping violence without all their relevant documentation or with little time on their hands because they're looking after kids or relatives, it can be really easy to make a mistake when applying for payments. In circumstances like this, we should be giving people a helping hand rather than punishing them for their small mistakes.

Where debts appear to stem from fraud, Services Australia has the power to investigate them more closely. But the majority of those Australians holding these debts have received them through no fault of their own. This impactful reform means Services Australia can focus more on what it should be doing—that is, supporting people who need help, not wasting energy hustling for small debts. It also says to the taxpayer, 'We are spending your money wisely, focusing on serious misconduct and fraud rather than chasing loose change from those doing it tough.'

Another part of this bill I want to highlight is the protection it gives to victims-survivors of family and domestic violence. As many in this chamber will know, financial abuse is one of the most insidious forms of coercive control. It is a way for perpetrators to trap partners and children to keep them dependent and to punish them long after they have escaped. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, one in four women and one in 14 men have experienced violence from an intimate partner since the age of 15. As a community, we now understand what has long been true—that violence extends beyond the physical and appears as emotional and financial coercion too. For many that find themselves in this situation, that looks like credit cards being taken out in their name, the emptying of joint bank accounts and the diversion of welfare moneys to another account. From my time working at the St Vincent de Paul Society in New South Wales, looking after a rather large team covering from Wyong to Helensburgh out to the Blue Mountains, including my own electorate of Barton, the Vinnies team and I saw the terrible impacts of coercive control and financial abuse on the lives of many people, mainly women, escaping domestic violence.

Under our current laws, if a person accrued a debt because they were coerced into signing forms or providing false information they could still be held liable. This debt is yet another burden that hangs over the victim at one of the most difficult times in their life. Think about that for a moment: the victim is punished for their abuser's actions. That is not only cruel; it undermines our commitment to end violence against women and children. This bill changes that. It gives Services Australia the discretion to waive debts in cases where coercion or financial abuse was a factor. It builds on the work of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse and reflects our commitment to entrench protection into every arm of the Commonwealth.

As someone who's worked with vulnerable clients, I cannot overstate the importance of this change. It tells victims-survivors: 'We see you, we believe you and we will not allow the system to be weaponised against you. When you come forward, you do not have to do so with fear of debt or of unjust consequences. Services Australia is here to help you rebuild and move forward, rather than binding you to the violence of your past, because we understand that financial security is a core part of ending domestic violence and that safety is not just physical; it's economic.'

I know that this part of the bill may sound a bit technical, but for thousands of Australians it matters deeply. From 1991 to 2020 a method known as income apportionment was used to calculate debts. The practice was inconsistent with the law at the time. It was unfair. And while it has not been used under this Albanese Labor government, we cannot simply reopen decades worth of historical cases—some of them already repaid, many involving people who've since passed away—without causing fresh uncertainty and distress.

So this bill draws a line in the sand. It clarifies the law to close off the uncertainty. More importantly, it establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. That means that people who have potentially affected debts between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 can apply for a resolution payment of up to $600. It's not perfect justice. Nothing can fully undo the harm caused. But it is recognition. It is a step towards closure. It is an acknowledgement that the system got it wrong. And, at its core, this bill is about respect—respect for the people who use the social security system, most of whom are engaging in good faith, trying to do the right thing, and juggling low incomes, insecure work and the rising cost of living. It's also about making sure people can trust the social security system after the trauma of the robodebt scheme. Australians deserve to know that we have learned from those mistakes and that our systems are transparent, lawful and humane.

When I doorknock in Rockdale, Kingsgrove, Hurstville and across my electorate of Barton I hear the same thing again and again: people just want systems that treat them fairly, clearly and with dignity. They don't want bureaucracy that punishes them for being poor, sick or in a crisis. Moreover, we want to make sure these people can access help to navigate the new resolution scheme. We're equipping Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service with $400,000 each. We want to make sure they have the resources available for those impacted by the scheme.

I know, too, that my team will be ready to help anyone in my electorate of Barton who finds themselves in this situation, who can simply attend my electorate office at Level 2, 24 Montgomery Street, Kogarah or send me an email at ash.ambihaipahar@aph.gov.au. We have a dedicated space for quiet conversations and staff on hand to help you navigate that system. The empathetic and efficient team at Services Australia Rockdale will also be on deck, as they are always there to help a lot of our electorate members.

This bill begins to change the culture of our welfare system. It says: no more chasing debts that cost more to collect than what they're worth; no more punishing women who've already endured abuse; and no more letting historic injustices fester.

We in this chamber have a responsibility to make systems work for people, not against them. We have a duty of service for these people to recognise their hardship, to help lift them up into better lives. We cannot bring fairness to every corner of the social security system overnight, but with this bill we are taking important practical steps in the right direction. As the member for Barton, I welcome these changes. As a lawyer, I know how overdue they are. And as someone who believes in the dignity of every person, I will always stand up for a social security system that reflects compassion, fairness and justice.

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today not just to support the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 but also to affirm this government's commitment to listening to those who are often unheard—often our most vulnerable. This bill is a testament to what happens when we listen, when we hear stories of people navigating complex systems and when we act to make those systems fairer, clearer and more humane. It is practical, it is careful and, above all, it is a compassionate reform.

This bill fixes technical problems that have lingered for years. It clarifies how employment income was treated before 7 December 2020. It values good-faith assessments that used income apportionment. It sets out lawful methods for any decisions to be made about those historic periods. It also improves our approaches to small debts.

I'll start with schedule 1, which inserts a new part into the Social Security Act. It validates the historical use of income apportionment from 1 July 1991 to 6 December 2020. This was a practice which resulted in the spread of known income across the employer's payroll period. Officials then attributed daily amounts to the relevant entitlement periods. It was based on pay slips; it was grounded in real payroll records. It was done in good faith, but at times it did not match the strict letter of the law as it stood then. So this bill validates the method for the past and it preserves general legal rights.

This schedule also gives decision-makers a clear rule book for any new decisions about pre-December-2020 income. There is a strict hierarchy: first, if the evidence shows when the income was earned, allocate it to that entitlement period; second, if the precise days are unknown but the payroll period is known, it is apportioned across that payroll period; third, if neither days nor the payroll period can be identified, take the income into account in the entitlement period in which it was received—evidence first, consistency next and guesswork last. The hierarchy respects real-life circumstances. Pay slips often show a fortnight or a month, not each shift. Rosters rarely line up with Centrelink fortnights. This method turns messy paperwork into fair decisions.

This bill also ensures consistency for youth training allowance decisions and former farm household support. It also makes sure that the old frameworks that referenced social security calculators line up with the same approach.

Let's think about the scale of this issue. Over three decades, there were about 5.5 million debts that were potentially affected, which touched around three million people. The estimation of this debt is around $4.4 billion. Most of these debts are old—on average, 19 years old. About 97 per cent of these have already been paid. Around 148,000 debts were paused while the issue was resolved. Sampling tells us that not every debt used apportionment, and, when it was used, the change in the final amount was usually very modest. On the sample, the median change was under $100, and about two-thirds decreased and one-third increased.

Schedule 2 of this legislation makes debt management fairer. It reforms special circumstance waivers, it lifts and standardises the small debt waiver threshold and it clears a backlog of tiny, undetermined amounts. Under current law, decision-makers cannot waive a debt if a person, or another person, knowingly made a false statement. This was a very hard line, and it does not reflect real stories. It does not reflect the realities of coercion or financial abuse. It does not reflect fear. This bill responds to what we have heard. It lets decision-makers consider the broader context. If conduct occurred, but it was justified by the circumstances, the waiver can be applied. That includes coercion, financial abuse, acute mental ill health, homelessness and serious dependence.

This change is in accordance with recommendation 58 of the 2024 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry into financial abuse and with the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. Recommendation 58 of the Financial abuse report called for reforms so that victims-survivors aren't blocked from special circumstances waivers if the perpetrator lies to Services Australia without the debtor's knowledge or if the debtor makes a false statement due to coercion or duress.

I was proud to work with Senator Deborah O'Neill on that inquiry, and I am reminded of the submission from the Council for Single Mothers and their Children: 'We regularly hear from women whose former partners used Services Australia systems to continue financial control. This includes manipulating Centrelink reporting requirements, lodging false claims or deliberately triggering compliance actions that result in payment suspensions. These actions are often taken without the woman's knowledge, leaving her without income and in financial distress.' We listened to some of the hard truths about the government systems, and we are acting. In that inquiry, what we saw was perpetrators using systems, whether it be banking or government systems, to perpetrate violence, abuse and financial coercion against their victims. It's unacceptable, and this government is acting to change our systems.

The explanatory memorandum describes the case of person L, whose then partner lied to them about their earnings. Any rational person would recognise that was not their fault nor their failing; it was coercion and control, and it was wrong. This is similar to other cases that I recall about abuse being enabled by structures long neglected. For too long the law said no because of the word 'knowingly', which left out coercion.

This bill also standardises the small debt waiver. The new threshold is $250 indexed each year to CPI. It removes clunky cost-effectiveness tests. This means fewer low-value debts, less churn and less stress on vulnerable people. There is a one-off clean-up too. If the amount under the threshold in the system at the commencement is not raised as a debt, the right to recover is waived. This clears backlogs created by pauses during COVID and natural disasters.

Schedule 3 of the legislation creates the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. It's simple, optional and time limited. It covers debts affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. Eligible people can receive a small, fixed resolution payment—in most cases between $200 and $600. It recognises the modest effect seen in sampling. It gives closure without forcing people to rebuild their work history. It avoids case-by-case recalculation. Why those dates? The daily attribution rules came in from September 2003 and interacted with the apportionment. In 2020 we moved to paid-date attribution, which made apportionment unnecessary.

The scheme will run for approximately 12 months. There will be flexibility for special cases. Some decisions can be made by a computer, where appropriate. There will be internal review for scheme decisions. Payments are tax free, and it is intended that they will be exempt from the social security income test by instrument. If a person accepts a resolution payment, they release the Commonwealth from liability for a claim about the use of apportionment for that debt. If they do not accept, they keep their rights—it's their choice.

Schedule 4 provides a special appropriation. It funds resolution payments and it funds amounts payable when division 3 income is worked out.

Let me be clear on one point: the payment systems at Services Australia may remind members of the public of the trauma of robodebt. This system cannot become robodebt, and it is a direct response designed to prevent it. Robodebt used tax data averaging to fabricate fortnightly income. It punished the vulnerable. It was unlawful. This bill validates a method grounded in evidence—real pay slips and real payroll records. It sets a lawful hierarchy for historical records. It preserves rights and adds safeguards. The bill also includes a full human rights statement. It engages the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living. It expands discretion where justice demands it. It lifts the small debt threshold. It offers a simple resolution payment.

Some will ask: why not recalculate everything? It's because that would take years and we must act now to shore up our social services system. It would force people, employers and banks to dig up ancient records, and it would deliver very small changes in most cases. So it would be a drag on resources and take away from actually servicing people today. Others will ask: why not waive everything? It's because in most cases the debt still exists under the proper method, because many debts were unaffected by the apportionment and because blanket refunds are not fair to others who followed the rules or repaid unrelated debts.

This bill reflects what fairness demands: validate what was done in good faith, fix the waiver rules, raise and index the small debt threshold, clear the old undetermined amounts and offer a modest optional resolution payment. That is guided, as I said, by evidence, order and clarity. Safeguards are built in. Justification must be evidenced for special circumstances waivers. The scheme is optional and time limited. Review rights exist within the scheme. The appropriation is specific. Validation is tightly confined to apportionment of employment income. General laws are preserved. The approach reflects consultation and evidence.

The ombudsman urged prompt, transparent remediation. Sampling showed that the impact of apportionment on the final amount was usually very small. Advocates argued for compassion; administrators argued for practicality. This bill blends both. Behind the scenes everyone is a person. It could be casuals juggling shifts, parents saving every pay slip or people whose payroll cycles never matched up with Centrelink fortnights. They deserve clarity, not years of reconstruction. They deserve decisions that reflect reality.

In passing, let me return to the financial abuse inquiry. Our job was to ensure that our systems do not entrench control. As one recommendation of the financial abuse inquiry said, victims must not be blocked from relief because an abuser compelled a mistake. Schedule 2 delivers that change. That's why I was proud to work with Senator Deborah O'Neill. From listening to the people, the victims-survivors, we were able to shape this reform. A majority female government is shaping systems that used to disempower victims to now disempower abusers, and we're acting on the national plan to prevent violence against women.

I also welcome the government's commitment to clarity for those who need payments. Services Australia will need a plain English guidance, clear tools for staff, letters tested with customer reference groups, outreach to those with paused debts, simple pathways into the scheme and support for people who need help to engage.

Policy choices have consequences. Australians expect systems that are lawful, humane and respectful. Let me address the safeguards in law. The validation is tightly confined to apportionment of employment income. To speak plainly, robodebt was the coalition's scheme. It used tax-year income averaging to invent fortnightly earnings. It ignored warnings. It hurt people. It was unlawful. This bill is part of the government's answer. It validates only assessments grounded in real pay slips and real payroll periods. It draws a bright statutory line that excludes income averaging. It has been scrutinised. It builds safeguards, transparency and a voluntary, time limited resolution scheme. The coalition's record shows that ideology overruled integrity. Our record shows evidence, lawfulness and respect. This bill sits squarely within Labor's social justice agenda, which seeks a fair social security system that is lawful by design, humane in practice and careful with public money and that validates good-faith decisions.

Basem Abdo (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australians should never be punished for seeking in good faith the help that their government offers them to manage life's challenges. Good government exists to lend a hand, not to turn that hand against the people it serves. Yet, through the bitter experience of robodebt, Australians have seen too clearly what happens when that principle is betrayed. Thousands of people were treated not as citizens entitled to fairness but as suspects to be pursued.

Labor is determined to repair the damage that was done to so many innocent Australians who were hurt by the previous coalition government's cruel and disastrous robodebt scheme, to restore trust, to uphold the law and to rebuild a system that treats people with dignity, because, when government makes an error, it is not a line on a spreadsheet that suffers; it is a person, it is families, it is the parent sitting at the kitchen table staring at a letter from Centrelink—it is the quiet humiliation of being told you owe money you don't have and never should have owed.

These mistakes go to the heart of something bigger than administration; they go to the social contract itself—the promise that our institutions will deal with people fairly and lawfully and that government will take responsibility when it falls short. That is why this bill is so important. It is addressing an issue that is less notorious and without the malice of robodebt but that, nevertheless, has a negative impact on vulnerable people in our community, and that is the longstanding process known as income apportionment.

With income apportionment, imagine your pay slip covers two weeks of work but begins halfway through a Centrelink fortnight. One week falls in the first Centrelink period, the other week in the next. If you work more shifts in one week than the other, your income fluctuates, so your payment should too. But for years Centrelink assumed that income was earned evenly across the whole pay slip period. It spread that pay across both fortnights, even though the law said that income could only be counted in the period it was actually earned. It made an assumption that every income-earning day was the same and that, as a result, recipients had been overpaid when in fact they hadn't. That's income apportionment. It sounds technical, but its consequences were very real.

For some, it meant an underpayment, a smaller payment than they were due. For many more, it meant a letter telling them they owed money to the Commonwealth. Debts were raised—some were repaid, some prosecuted—all based on a practice that was later found to be unlawful. This went on for nearly two decades and, while this was not robodebt—it was not automated, nor was it implemented against legal advice—it shared a troubling trait: a deep-seated presumption of mistrust towards those who rely on government support.

When the system starts from a belief that people on welfare are to be met with distrust, errors multiply and compassion disappears. That attitude costs more than money: it corrodes trust, it hardens the spirit of social safety nets and it leaves a stain that can take generations to remove.

Tammy is a financial counsellor who works with people in my community. She saw firsthand the real-life damage that was done to people who were slugged with a wrongful debt by income apportionment at a time when they were already struggling to stay afloat. Tammy told my office: 'There's this depressing feeling of "I'm being punished again. The government is after me. Oh, my goodness, it's the government. I'm scared and I need this money for my children." They'd often call Centrelink and agree to a payment plan where they'd promise something they couldn't afford. Imagine not having enough money for food because you've overpromised, you've got this debt and the government wants their money back and you feel like you are being punished. There's a sense of shame in not having enough money for food. Nobody ever wants to hear their child say, "I'm hungry, Mum."'

This is the bitter legacy that mechanisms like income apportionment left for far too many Australians. Thankfully, this legislation ends that once and for all. In 2020 a Federal Court decision made it clear beyond doubt that income apportionment was not permitted under the law that then stood. The government changed the legislation that year to fix the issue going forward, but that still left an enormous historical tangle. Decades of debts and decisions had been made using a method now deemed unlawful.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation examined what should happen next and what should have happened much sooner. The Ombudsman found that, since at least 2003, Services Australia and its predecessor agencies had been unlawfully spreading income across multiple fortnights. The effect was that people's payments were often calculated on the wrong evidence at the wrong time and for the wrong amount. The investigation also found that, when doubts were first raised in 2020, the agencies took too long to act. They sought multiple rounds of legal advice, some of it conflicting, but delayed finalising a clear position. They paused around 13,000 debt reviews and identified 87,000 potentially affected cases but failed to alert oversight bodies quickly enough. The Ombudsman made four key recommendations: (1) seek an authoritative legal view from the Solicitor-General or the Federal Court, (2) develop a clear policy on the secretary's power to review historical debts, (3) work with the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to manage the impact on past and future criminal cases and (4) share all relevant legal advice transparently across agencies.

The agencies accepted or partially accepted every one of those recommendations. The Ombudsman's message was plain: the law must be followed even, and especially, when it is inconvenient. This is a very important principle which we must never forget, especially when it's inconvenient. The administration of social security must be transparent, accountable and humane. This bill is the government's comprehensive response—an effective, rational response. It fixes the rules, reforms the debt process and builds in fairness for the future.

For the first time in more than 30 years, the small debt waiver threshold will rise to $250 and will now be indexed annually to CPI. That single change will wipe or prevent about 1.2 million small, undetermined debts in 2025-26—almost half the backlog currently sitting with Services Australia. It makes no sense to spend more money recovering a debt than the debt is worth. This change saves taxpayers money and spares ordinary Australians unnecessary stress. It brings an outdated threshold, unchanged since the 1990s, in line with modern realities.

Importantly, this bill also expands the special circumstances waiver, allowing decision-makers to consider a person's broader life circumstances when deciding whether a debt should be pursued, including extending it to situations of financial abuse or coercive control. If someone's partner controlled their access to income or pressured them to give false information, the system should recognise that. This reform delivers on Labor's 2025 election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems and implement a key recommendation of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse. It ensures that our welfare system can never again be weaponised against those already living with abuse. It is practical reform with profound moral importance.

The bill also addresses the long shadow left by the income apportionment practice itself. Between the early nineties and 2020, millions of debts were calculated by using this method. The scale of this legacy is immense: around 5.5 million debts involving three million people and worth approximately $4.4 billion. To manually recalculate them would take years and divert thousands of staff away from their core job of supporting Australians who need help right now. That is why this bill does two things: first, it retrospectively validates the historical use of income apportionment to prevent mass legal uncertainty. Second, it creates a fair and compassionate pathway for those affected through the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. Under the scheme, people with debts from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020 will be eligible. They can apply for resolution payments of up to $600, depending on the size of their original debt. Applications open in January of next year.

This is how good governments should act, in terms of admitting where fault lines are in the system, compensating fairly and ensuring that such errors cannot recur, with a response that does not overwhelm the very same system designed to support vulnerable Australians. Others have asked, 'Is this robodebt 2.0?' It's not. Robodebt was a scheme born of deliberate disregard. It was automated and unlawful and was maintained against explicit legal advice. Income apportionment was a human error—manual, mistaken and unchallenged for too long, but never driven by malice. Yet both are linked by a common thread: the need to rebuild trust between citizens and the state. That is what this bill sets out to do. This package is fair, and it is fiscally responsible. It has an indicative cost of $283.7 million over the forward estimates and $41.2 million per year ongoing from 2029-30.

Those numbers matter, but so does what they represent: a system that values fairness, efficiency and humanity in equal measure. For decades, the administrative machinery of welfare debt recovery has been built on the assumption that error and fraud are widespread, but the evidence shows that the overwhelming majority of Australians do the right thing. This legislation recognises that reality and shifts our system from suspicion to support. In electorates like mine, where casual and shift work is common and people juggle multiple jobs to make ends meet, these technical errors are not abstract. They're lived experience. They're the reason someone's rent fell behind or their electricity was disconnected. This bill means those people will not be chased for minimal errors. It means decision-makers can see the full picture, including when coercion or abuse were at play. It means those affected by an unlawful process have a clear and fair path to closure.

The lessons from this saga extend beyond Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. They go to the culture of government itself. The ombudsman called it a lesson in lawfulness and a reminder that good intentions are not enough if the law is not followed and oversight is ignored. Transparency and accountability are not optional extras. They are the conditions of public trust. In government, mistakes will sometimes happen, but integrity is measured by how government responds to them. This bill represents that response. It is grounded in recognition, guided by law and motivated by compassion. This legislation is about more than technical amendments. It's about restoring a simple but vital truth: our social security system exists to support, not to punish. It ensures that people who did nothing wrong are not left carrying the burden of bureaucratic error. It upholds the law, strengthens protections and clears away years of accumulated unfairness. It reflects what Labor stands for: a government that takes responsibility, fixes mistakes and treats every Australian with respect.

I want to acknowledge the Minister for Social Services for her careful and principled work on this issue and on all issues in relation to her portfolio. I thank the community organisations—Economic Justice Australia, ACOSS, Legal Aid and so many others—who have advocated tirelessly on this issue. This is thoughtful, responsible reform. It is about integrity in administration, compassion in government and justice for ordinary Australians who deserve nothing less. I'll leave you with a thought from Tammy, who made it clear that being liberated from a punitive debt can be life altering for people on the margins: 'It means less stress. It means that a parent in crisis can say, "I will be okay; my kids will be okay." It means they've got a fighting chance to keep their heads above water.' When people reach out for help, their government should meet them with a hand, not a demand.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for Calwell for his excellent contribution to the debate, as I thank members on both sides who have contributed to the debate. I particularly want to thank the newly elected members who spoke about what these social security reforms will mean in their local communities. These debt reforms will make a big difference in particular to many women who have suffered or continue to suffer financial coercion and abuse. In wiping 1.2 million underdetermined debts from the backlog in 2025-26 alone, the government is also sparing many thousands of low-income Australian families the stress of being pursued for small debts. We are directing taxpayer money more efficiently to the task of helping people who need it now, focusing compliance action on large and deliberate debts, and moving our social security system a step further away from the shame of robodebt.

This Labor government has shown we are willing to tackle longstanding problems and to do so fairly and in close consultation with the people who have been most affected. Since the introduction of this bill, officials from my department have continued to consult with the agencies who will administer these changes and the representatives of the people who will be most affected. In particular, I want to thank Economic Justice Australia, National Legal Aid and the Australian Council of Social Service, who have dedicated their time to advising the government on this bill. There's always more to do in making our social security system fairer, safer and easier to use. These organisations represent the experiences of so many Australians, and I believe the collaborative approach that we've brought to this legislation lays a foundation for us to achieve further reforms.

The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee has also inquired into this bill and carried out further consultation. I really want to thank the members of the committee for their considered report and for the support offered for this bill. The committee, too, heard strong advocacy from social security recipients and their representatives. This lived experience is reflected in key parts of the legislation, particularly in the debt reform measures. The CEO of Single Mother Families Australia, Ms Terese Edwards, told the committee:

For many years—in fact, decades—people who rely upon our safety net have been demonised, and when there are cuts they're usually to social security. Where there's more work for people to do, it's in the social security system. This is a cultural statement as well. This is why it is—

an—

administrative outcome, but … also a cultural statement, and this cannot be lost. We're hoping that this will build on the fantastic work of saying to Australians, 'If you are in need of our social security net, you can do that with respect and without feeling like you are not being believed and knowing that you will be safe to do that.'

The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 is an important step towards a better social security system delivering measures which will produce fairer outcomes for Australians. These measures reform the way we manage social security debts and resolve the longstanding issue of income apportionment. As I said when I introduced this bill, past governments used income apportionment in good faith with a genuinely held but incorrect understanding of the law. The Albanese government has never used income apportionment, but, with this legislation, we are resolving this historic issue in the fairest and most reasonable way possible. By validating the past use of income apportionment we spare taxpayers the cost of having government recalculate millions of debts going back decades. That would be, of course, very stressful for income support recipients who may have incurred a debt decades ago, and it would be both expensive and pointless for taxpayers. This validation also recognises the important fact that, based on Services Australia's sampling, in most cases affected by income apportionment, a debt was still owed but was miscalculated around the edges.

The government's resolution scheme is carefully designed to remedy those mistakes. People with historic debts potentially affected by income apportionment will be eligible to apply for payments of up to $600. Any payment they receive will reflect the size of the debt in question and the most generous interpretation of the possible impact income apportionment had on it. I'll release additional details about the scheme soon. We will continue to work with non-government organisations to monitor people's take-up of the scheme, making sure the process is as simple as possible. I'll just repeat one assurance I've already made: no-one is obliged to participate in this scheme and no-one is prevented from exercising any legal rights to pursue a claim relating to their debt.

The debt reform measures in this bill will bring material changes to many Australians under financial pressure. The bill increases the small debt waiver threshold to $250, to be indexed annually in line with the consumer price index It brings the old thresholds into a single, unified amount, and, through indexation, this amount will maintain its value relative to the broader economy. The 1.2 million undetermined debts that this will wipe from the backlog in 2025-26 alone are 1.2 million debts that Services Australia will not waste time and resources chasing. The government is strengthening compliance measures to ensure this provision is not exploited, but we know the vast majority of people engage with our social security system honestly and in good faith.

The bill also expands access to the special circumstances waiver, to protect victims-survivors of financial abuse and coercion. This is a very important measure. This change provides an explicit recognition of the fact that this abuse can manifest in a victim being coerced into not meeting certain payment requirements. Decision-makers will now be able to take these circumstances into account in considering a special circumstances debt waiver. This provision addresses another point of weaponisation of the social security system, and it responds to calls from stakeholders articulated through both the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032 and the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme. Our implementation of this reform is of keen interest to many advocates in the family, domestic and sexual violence area and advocates for social security reform also. It does bring policy change for Services Australia, and the leadership of Services Australia has assured the parliament through the Senate committee hearings that they are ready to deliver this change across the country.

Someone who has been coerced into taking on a social security debt should not be further victimised and punished by a system that should be offering her support. The Albanese Labor government believes in a strong social security system. Part of that commitment means taking on protracted policy challenges which others have put in the too-hard basket. With the passage of this legislation, our system will be stronger, fairer and more responsive to the needs of the Australian community. It's the end result of a major body of work encompassing some very, very complex and contested legal and policy matters. I want to thank the many officials who've dedicated themselves to this work, and also the Minister for Government Services for her cooperation and support. The government remains committed to implementing the remaining recommendations of the robodebt royal commission. Members should note that three-quarters of these are now implemented or well progressed, and I look forward to getting on with the rest of them. I commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.