Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

’Non-controversial’ can mean different things in different contexts, Senator, although feel free to move to take it out of non-controversial if you want to.

Let me start again. Senator Colbeck, you are saying that the intention is to make sure that people entitled to that $1,000 as a lump sum spend it on the child’s welfare. I guess there is one thing I would like to establish. As I understand it, the income management regime has a list of things that people are able to spend money on—necessities, for want of a more precise term. Will people actually need to check what they spend this $1,000 on? If they want to buy some counselling or some therapy for their child, will they need to go to Centrelink and say, ‘I want this therapy; is that okay?’ Or is it a given that they can spend it on therapy and will not need to go and check with Centrelink about the type of therapy it is and whether or not it is appropriate for that child—those sorts of things? You can take that on notice if need be. I appreciate that it is not your portfolio.