Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

I'd like to return to some of my comments around the cashless debit card when this bill, the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management to Cashless Debit Card Transition) Bill 2019 was last debated in the House, in February last year.

Firstly, what is the purpose of the cashless debit card trials? In principle, they're designed to assist people to make positive choices with the spending of working age Centrelink payments and to limit the amount of discretionary spending on alcohol and gambling. Again, it's critical that we acknowledge in this place not everyone on Centrelink payments spend money on alcohol and gambling. Isolated sites were chosen so that thorough research could be undertaken to determine whether the implementation of the cashless debit card had an overall positive or negative affect on the community. Nearly two years after we last debated this legislation, we still don't have the academic research to hand to determine if the cashless debit card is in fact effective. The University of Adelaide report examining the effectiveness of the card in the Goldfields region was due at the end of this year. This report is now expected to be released early in the new year.

Now before us we have a bill to extend the cashless welfare card at its current sites and also to transition recipients of the BasicsCard in the Northern Territory and in Cape York to the cashless debit card. I'll come back to the Northern Territory and Cape York shortly, but I'd like to examine the current sites where the card is operating.

Without the academic evidence that the card is working or not working, decision-making on the extension of the current sites is made on site visits by Centre Alliance and the anecdotal evidence garnered whilst on those visits. Firstly, I would like to talk about my visit to the Ceduna community. Ceduna was the first community in Australia to trial the cashless debit card. In the course of making a determination on this piece of legislation, I visited the Ceduna community and met with a number of organisations and participants on the card, including the Ceduna day centre, the District Council of Ceduna and Red Cross, and I visited the town camp and the sobering-up unit. I did of course speak with a number of residents on the card.

The results from Ceduna are somewhat mixed. The District Council of Ceduna advises us that the card has been transformational in the community, has reduced public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour and has increased tourism. There are positive signs. The Ceduna day centre said there hasn't been a lot of difference and that people get around the card. They go and use the card to buy fishing rods, and then they try and flag down tourists and see if they can get a deal where they get some cash in return for the fishing rods and then have cash in their hand. With respect to participants, some were in favour of the card, some felt that their personal rights were infringed and some were ambivalent to the card—the card was not really impacting their choices in their day-to-day life.

Ceduna introduced alcohol restrictions independently of the trial site in September 2015. The East Kimberley region introduced additional takeaway alcohol management from December 2015. So it's hard to know whether it is the trial of the card or something entirely different that's responsible for any of the positive outcomes that have been reported. There are a few pieces of conclusive data. For example, in the 12 months after the Ceduna trial there was a 12 per cent reduction in poker machine revenue in Ceduna and the surrounding local government areas. Unfortunately, we don't have any up-to-date information for this. I would very much appreciate it if the government could advise us with respect to poker machine revenue.

I have also visited the community of Hervey Bay, in the Hinkler electorate, with my colleague Senator Stirling Griff. We again met with a number of organisations and with police, and we held a roundtable at the end of the day with a number of participants. I would like to thank all organisations and participants, who were generous with their time, particularly the participants who travelled down from Bundaberg. I know that was quite a challenge for some people. We were appreciative of people being very candid, very open and talking with us about the trial. I had meetings with Queensland police, headspace and the Fraser Coast council. In discussions with police, they said they were initially concerned the rollout of the card would see an increase in theft, particularly at outlets that sold alcohol. They were pleased to report to me that this hasn't occurred. I think it's fair to determine that the police would like to see the card continue in the Hinkler region. They also acknowledged that some people were finding a way around the card in order to obtain cash—a little like Ceduna—including people buying goods with their card and then swapping those goods for cash.

St Vincent de Paul has a large support centre in Hervey Bay. The group of members we met with supported the continuance of the card, because they felt that it hadn't been trialled long enough. There were positive signs that they had fewer people seeking emergency food relief. St Vincent de Paul did want to stress that much of the challenge for people receiving Newstart and youth allowance is the low rate of money received, no matter how it's divided between their bank account and the cashless debit card, and that the rate of both those payments needed immediate attention. I agree with St Vincent de Paul on this matter. We really do need to raise the rate. It would be an immediate boost to our economy.

I met with We Care 2, who provide emergency relief, counselling, free breakfast and a food bank style low-cost supermarket for people on healthcare cards, including pensioners. We Care 2 reported an increase in people purchasing food at their low-cost supermarket and a decrease in people seeking emergency relief. This is a very positive sign, but we do not have any reports to confirm this; we are working on anecdotal evidence. I acknowledge that we want to see less demand on those emergency services. We don't want people needing to go to organisations in a deep state of distress and we want to ensure that people have an amount of money that means they can afford to put food in the cupboard.

When I met with participants on the card, some of the themes that were picked up in Ceduna had continued. Firstly, some people felt there was a stigma to being on the card if the word 'Indue' was on the card. I understand the government has changed this and that the actual word 'Indue' is no longer on any new cards issued. It would be really important for government to reissue cards to people who would like to change from a card with 'Indue' on it to a card that looks like a normal credit card.

Another issue that many people raised with me was the schedule, with Indue, for paying rent. Basically, there's a 28-day rolling cycle. If you pay it a couple of days late in your first week, it essentially changes the payment schedule for the following weeks and you can become behind in your rent. I would urge government to have a look at the 28-day payment schedule. It's quite a rigid schedule and it's creating a lot of challenges for people who are paying rent but who can't pay through Centrepay.

There were concerns that the card would fail when people were at supermarkets. There was a heightened anxiety about that. I understand that when the card was in its infancy there were a few algorithm issues and cards would fail, but I understand from government that much of that has been addressed.

Finally, there is a great difficulty for many people to purchase second-hand goods. You can use your card to purchase second-hand goods, whether they're on eBay or perhaps Gumtree, but there are challenges around that. Similarly, you can't use your card if you are trying to pay off a payday lender, and that is a serious matter that I would really like the government to address. We've had discussions around this for a number of years in this place—the government has even had a draft bill around payday lending—but we have seen it go nowhere. Nearly every participant on the card that I have talked to has had a payday lender debt, and that was taking up a significant amount of the Centrelink payment that they received. I think that would very much address a number of the challenges people have in maintaining a budget.

The cashless debit card will not change behaviours of participants on its own. There must be a network of social services to support the participants to change behaviour, whether it relates to alcohol addiction, gambling addiction or other damaging behaviour. When I was in Ceduna, I saw a lot of services; however, there were some deficiencies. There were no residential alcohol rehabilitation services or substance abuse services within Ceduna. People needed to travel to Port Augusta. It would be really good to see services in there. In Hervey Bay, it was difficult to determine if there was any extra spending of government money to provide services to support people. Ultimately, this is about helping people to address any addictions and seek employment. I do not believe we will truly know how successful the trials have been until much more data is collected, especially as the research findings and community responses from the trials to date have been so mixed.

I would like to touch briefly on the remote Aboriginal communities. I recently discussed with the Central Land Council their concerns on the potential impact of the cashless debit card on the remote communities that they represent. These are communities that not only are highly remote but also lack basic telecommunications and internet infrastructure and banking services. Currently, with the BasicsCard, Centrelink teams visit their communities on a regular rotational basis, providing their communities with face-to-face interactions and discussions that help them to overcome the limited financial and digital literacy skills and capacity that exist in communities. However, with the cashless debit card it is unclear how or if the Indue subcontractor will be required or even if they will be able to provide similar face-to-face services or provide permanent shopfront services in such communities that exist in places such as Hervey Bay or Ceduna. It's unlikely to be feasible on the grounds of cost. In my view, Centrelink remains the most appropriate organisation to provide that interface between remote communities and a card, be it the cashless welfare card or a BasicsCard.

The most concerning issue that was raised with me by both the Central Land Council and other Indigenous Northern Territory organisations is the complete lack of consultation the government has undertaken with communities that will be affected by the card. I understand there have been some limited information sessions, but there has been no consultation about the implementation or administration of the cashless debit card if the rollout goes ahead. This is simply unacceptable. It's a major policy change that will impact thousands of lives; it should be accompanied by genuine consultation. For this reason, I'm intending to travel to the Northern Territory to undertake consultations directly so that I can hear on-the-ground concerns with members, and I would really urge the government to do the same.

With my Centre Alliance colleagues in another place, we will be asking the government to not bring this bill on for a vote. We want to see the University of Adelaide report; we want to ensure that there's consultation in the Northern Territory before this bill becomes law and before the card is rolled out further. Thank you.

See this speech in context