Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 28 August, Senator Siewert asked me, in my capacity as Minister representing the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, questions about Indigenous communities. I seek leave to incorporate the answer in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The answer read as follows—

SENATOR SIEWERT—28 AUGUST 2008

INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES

The legislative strategy for SEAM includes a balance of mandatory provisions, where Centrelink must act, and some discretionary provisions (to ensure that there are adequate safeguards for individual families).

Underpinning the legislation is the power for the Minister to make guidelines by way of a legislative instrument. These will be supported by policy guidelines, which will be finalised in conjunction with relevant agencies and respective Ministers’ offices.

Special circumstances. There are provisions in the primary legislation and supported by policy guidelines, which allow Centrelink to determine whether a customer is experiencing special circumstances which mean they are unable to meet their participation requirements and a temporary exemption is therefore warranted. General exemptions include major personal crisis, major disruption to the person’s home, cultural business and sorry business. Centrelink must determine what evidence is required to support the customer’s claim and the exemption period.

Reasonable Excuse and Special Circumstances Relating to this Measure Detailed guidance on the application of reasonable excuse principles and special circumstances will be provided in policy guidelines and/or legislative instruments. The policy guidelines will include examples of acceptable excuses and circumstances, details of the types of verification that may be required to substantiate a claim of reasonable excuse and suggested review timeframes.

Examples of categories of reasonable excuse are:

Enrolment

School Related Reasons

• No appropriate school places available in area
• Reasonable belief that school cannot provide a safe environment and no other appropriate school available)
• School or education authority rejects application (and no other appropriate school available)
• School vacation period

Health/Mental Health Reasons

• Parent has severe drug, alcohol and/or mental health issues (this reason could also trigger a re-assessment of care arrangements and/or referral to State or Territory child welfare authorities)
• Illness of parent prevents necessary contact with school
• Temporary inability to contact school by any means
• Child incapacitated beyond the limit of available school resources (e.g. child has a profound disability) Literacy/CALD Reasons
• Parent unable to comprehend requirement and no interpreter available
• Child unable to benefit from schooling without special interventions (e.g. interpreter or remedial reading consultant) not available in area Other Reasons
• Domestic issues such as domestic violence, homelessness, jail, urgent additional caring duties, other traumatic incidents
• Schooling requirement child has unavoidable caring responsibilities
• Bereavement: death of close family member or member of cultural group with recognised traditions of extended bereavement (e.g. most traditional Indigenous clans, some non-Christian faiths)
• Permanently moved out of area/in the process of moving

Attendance

School Related Reasons

• Child expelled or suspended and no other appropriate enrolment available (education authority interventions might be expected in this scenario)
• School cannot provide a safe environment, for reasons such as systemic bullying of the child (and no other appropriate school available)
• School vacation period
• School closure due to natural disaster, fire, storm damage, vandalism etc.

Health Reasons

• Illness of parent when parent is sole means of transport to school or where that illness renders the parent unable to prepare the child for school
• Illness of the child prevents attendance
• Parent has severe drug, alcohol and/or mental health issues (this reason could also trigger a re-assessment of care arrangements and/or referral to State or Territory child welfare authorities)
• Parent (female) is within six weeks of confinement for childbirth

Mobility Reasons

• Transport previously available becomes unavailable, and no suitable alternative exists
• Persistent weather prevents attendance (e.g. floods block access to school for extended period)

Other Reasons

• Independent volition of child (parent is genuinely trying to engage with school or education authority but child is resisting or ignoring those efforts)
• Schooling requirement child has unavoidable caring responsibilities
• Domestic issues such as domestic violence, homelessness, jail, urgent and major additional caring duties or other traumatic incident
• Permanently moved out of area

Special Circumstances

The special circumstances provisions of the legislation are designed as a further safeguard against unwarranted penalisation of parents or their children through the suspension or cancellation of income support payments.

Centrelink can use special circumstances to encourage or promote behavioural change in parents by restoring and back-paying suspended payments on the promise of future compliance. For example, special circumstances could be applied to lift a suspension immediately where Centrelink has negotiated action by a parent to enrol their child in school when the parent travels to town on the following Monday.

Another illustration of special circumstances would be in the event that, following the application of a suspension period, a school fails to formally notify Centrelink of a parent’s improved compliance. In these circumstances, Centrelink could lift the suspension while liaising with the school.

Other instances of special circumstances apply in relation to the restoration of payments. For example, there could be factors that were not drawn to Centrelink’s attention when the decision to suspend was made, but would have worked against the decision to suspend if known at the time.