Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Cashless Debit Card) Bill 2017. The matter of the cashless debit card is a complex one. Labor has consulted many communities and many key stakeholders from around the country. We've received a wide diversity of opinions from both communities and individuals within those communities. We have heard from some communities and individuals who strongly oppose the cashless debit card. We heard from some communities and some individuals who strongly support it. Labor understands that there are areas where there is a community desire to try something new to address drug and alcohol abuse, poverty and the implications of those things, but we also understand that not all communities want this. We understand that there are certain aspects of this measure which are arbitrary and unnecessary.

The member for Grey should support Labor's amendments because he has himself admitted that there are barnacles on this scheme that need knocking off. He said in his speech just a moment ago that there needs to be more finesse. He has actually admitted there are problems with the way in which this scheme is being implemented. He mentioned St Vincent de Paul. One of the things that Labor heard very much in relation to this card was the inability for it to be used at markets and in thrift shops. We've also heard that, when there was a power outage in one of these communities, it meant that people could not use this card for over a week.

But the other thing that really has convinced Labor to take the position that we are taking is that it is a blanket approach, and there is no way for people to come off that card if they are put onto it. There is no pathway. The evaluation that has been done in relation to this particular measure was one of the most flawed evaluations and pieces of work that I have read for a very long time. In fact, it admitted that the very purpose for which this card was set up—and that was to cut back and reduce violence—has not been achieved in the communities where it has been trialled.

This legislation stems from the 2017 budget, when the government proposed establishing trials of the cashless debit card in a further two locations from 1 September 2017. This bill proposes to allow the government to do this by repealing section 124PF of the Social Security (Administration) Act, which provides a number of limitations on the government's cashless debit card trials. Currently, the section has three relevant functions: first, for the existing trial to end on 30 June 2018; second, to limit the trial to three discrete trial areas; and, third, for the trial areas to encompass no more than 10,000 participants in total. These limitations mean that the government can establish one further trial site and all trials will end on 30 June this year. It will be up to the parliament to authorise additional trials above and beyond those prescribed under this section. Since the introduction of the existing trials, the government proposed establishing additional trial sites in the Goldfields of Western Australia and Bundaberg in Queensland.

Of course, Labor referred this bill to a Senate inquiry, appropriately, to allow for more comprehensive assessment of the efficacy of this bill. In particular, the Senate inquiry heard from communities in both existing trial sites, as well as in the proposed additional trial sites in Western Australia and Queensland. The Senate inquiry made a number of concerning findings. First, there was insufficient consultation with these communities; in particular, there was no clear framework or process to establish whether there was community desire for trials to be established in the relevant trial sites. That is very concerning, and it seemed to me to be one of the most fundamental points. Second, and just as concerning, was the finding that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the trials were effective. Third, the inquiry heard that the Orima evaluations of the trial, which I have just referred to and which the government has sought to rely on, were unreliable and were not based on any empirical methods of evaluation. As I said, it was a very poor evaluation and found that the card made no difference to the levels of violence in those communities. Labor is also concerned that the existing trials in Ceduna and Kalgoorlie have not been running long enough for substantive conclusions to be made.

It is clear that we require more rigorous and comprehensive information regarding the card's efficacy. Labor does not believe in a blanket approach to income management, and we do not support a national rollout of the cashless debit card. We know that the vast majority of income support recipients are more than capable of managing their own finances. We know that the vast majority of income support recipients require support on a temporary basis until such time as they are able to regain basic financial security. Labor supports community-driven approaches to tackling deep-seated social issues which perpetuate the cycle of poverty and violence. We believe in continued contact and consultation with communities with chronic unemployment in relation to income management and on whether the card is an appropriate measure for these communities.

We understand that some, not all, communities are simply so desperate to break the chronic cycle of unemployment and poverty and all that that means that they are open to trying measures such as the cashless debit card. To that end, Labor will support the use of the card where a community decides that this measure is what they wish to implement. From our discussions with local communities in Ceduna and East Kimberley, it seems as if some members of those communities wish for those trials to be extended. Labor will move to amend the bill to extend the end date of the trials to 30 June 2019 so that a proper and comprehensive evaluation can take place. Labor will not support the rollout of the card anywhere or at any time without important limitations.

The Liberals seek a blank cheque on this measure, and we are not prepared to provide that blank cheque. We do not believe in the vague and insufficiently credible evidence to justify the pursuit of these trials. The evidence and the evaluation that the government has sought to rely on for further trials is inconclusive at best, and there is some concern about the way in which those conclusions in that evaluation were arrived at. There simply is not credible evidence to support the establishment of further trials. We will not support the establishment of further trials in the Bundaberg or Goldfields regions or any further trials. However, as I've said, we are willing to move an amendment to existing trial sites so that there can be proper evaluation.

Labor understands that the complexity of chronic unemployment, poverty and entrenched social issues cannot and will not simply be solved by income management alone. With the many years that I have worked in the social services area, the human services area and the Indigenous area, I find that this is somehow being viewed by some members opposite as some sort of magic bullet. A cashless debit card is not a magic bullet to solve the many, many years of history of chronic and complex problems that exist in these communities. To paint it as such is nothing short of a scandal.

Labor will propose a number of amendments to this bill and to the use of this measure. As I have said previously, Labor will propose to amend the bill to ensure that the existing trial sites in Ceduna and East Kimberley be given the opportunity to extend their trials to 30 June 2019 to allow a comprehensive and proper evaluation. Labor will also propose an amendment to ensure that no new trial sites can be established, by proposing to reduce the provision from three trial sites to the existing two. This is a really important discussion. It is not up to people that will never be affected to make decisions on behalf of these communities. It is not up to the local council and it is not up to individual members of parliament—those people will not be put on income management. It is up to those people that will be affected by these measures to have a proper say. It is not clear how the decisions have been arrived at in relation to the Goldfields and Bundaberg, and that is unacceptable. We are questioning whether or not there has, in fact, been proper consultation and discussion with those who will be affected in those two proposed trial sites.

Labor will only consider the introduction of a new trial site if the Liberal government can show that they have an agreed, formal consultation process with the community as well as an agreed definition of 'consent'. How on earth can you apply these measures to thousands of people without those two things? Labor understands that the holistic, community-driven approach is the best way to address chronic poverty and unemployment, so Labor will propose the guarantee of funding for wraparound services in the trial sites formally within the legislation. This goes to my point that this is not a magic bullet.

Ensuring basic welfare for all Australians, broader than the social safety net in itself, is an important thing to understand. We do not believe that the Turnbull government can be trusted when it comes to income support. That has been seen in the way the Social Services portfolio has been managed. That includes things like the proposed introduction of drug testing, 22 million calls being unanswered in Centrelink and, of course, the robo-debt debacle.

I will conclude by saying this: the government proposes the cashless debit card not because it is genuinely interested in lifting up our most vulnerable citizens but because it seeks to perpetrate an inaccurate and unfair narrative: that our most vulnerable Australians cannot be trusted with their own spending needs. I urge the government to reflect on going out and supporting these new trial sites. I urge the government, and the members of the crossbench in particular, to give serious consideration to the amendments that Labor proposes for this bill. We are not for one moment saying that there aren't chronic problems. We aren't for one moment saying that there doesn't need to be government intervention in a very meaningful way in many of these communities. We know that employment is important to changing the life choices and chances for many people who are currently welfare dependent, but the thought that a cashless debit card is some sort of magic bullet that is going to fix all those social ills is absolutely a nonsense.

We have thought about this very deeply. We have consulted wisely. We have considered very, very carefully the position Labor is taking on this. It is not a position that we have come to quickly, and it is not a position that we have come to in some sort of a kneejerk reaction. It is a position that we have come to through proper consultation and discussion, as I have said, with the people currently on the cashless debit card or, as the government is proposing, in the communities of those additional trial sites. We're simply saying to the government: 'Look at these amendments. Consider them carefully. Let's make sure that any measures that are going to be addressing the deep-seated issues in those communities are measures that are going to work and that have the wrap-around services that make sure income management can be done in a way that gives people pride, options and choice.' None of those things exist in this current legislation. Labor is simply saying to the members of the government and the crossbench, 'Give serious consideration to these amendments.' It has been the result of a Senate inquiry. I oppose the bill as it currently stands.

See this speech in context