Stirling Griff (SA, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Cashless Debit Card) Bill 2017. This bill will allow the government to expand the cashless debit card into any new region it chooses by removing the existing limits. The introduction of this card into vulnerable communities is very much a complex issue. There are passionate opinions on all sides, and my office has heard many people who either strongly endorse the card or strongly oppose it. I'm sure other senators in this place have also had similar calls from constituents. This is not an easy issue, and all we can say with certainty is that we do not yet have enough information to take a firm position on whether it benefits or harms participants and communities.

It is an incredibly expensive experiment to continue the card trials, let alone expand them as this bill seeks to do. On that basis, the Nick Xenophon Team cannot support the bill as currently drafted. Why? Because the available data on the trial is inconclusive. At this stage, there are too many unanswered questions, and we have significant concerns relating to the quality of the outcome data for the trials in Ceduna and the East Kimberley. We also do not think the trials have run for long enough to be conclusive.

I need to take a moment to respond to Senator Bernardi's bemusing dummy spit against former Senator Xenophon and NXT when he rose to speak on this bill last week. The debit card is a serious issue that deserves serious debate. But Senator Bernardi was so busy carrying on with his ideological rant that he endorsed the cashless debit card bill outright, without reference to the ORIMA report or any of the criticisms of the evaluation. It was a squandered and selfish use of the Senate's time.

The Nick Xenophon Team does not want the Australian taxpayer to bear the costs of implementing further trials beyond the three the government originally intended. We know that the trial has come at a significant cost of $25.5 million, or around $12,000 for each and every participant. It is important to collect solid trial data so we can know with certainty whether this card is worth pursuing more widely. Many community leaders continue to advocate strongly for the card to continue, and we are willing to offer qualified support to a limited extension of the trial sites allowed for in the existing legislation.

We believe that if proper and full evaluations are undertaken, a further 12-month period should provide enough data to allow us all to properly consider whether the trial can achieve positive social outcomes for the communities affected. Former Senator Kakoschke-Moore visited Ceduna twice and also visited Kununurra to engage with community members, leaders and the local population in the trial communities to better inform her views and those of the Nick Xenophon Team. She had previously summarised the view of the individuals, businesses, community groups, health workers and NGOs as: 'The trial seems to be working, but it is way too early to tell.' My colleague the member for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie, has also undertaken a lot of work on this issue and has spoken in the other place about the need to continue the trial for a limited period.

The ORIMA evaluation reports indicate that the trials have been effective in reducing alcohol consumption and gambling at both trial sites, but these findings have been based predominantly on self-reported data, so we can't discount that survey respondents may have been seeking to present themselves in the best possible light. Seventy-seven per cent of participants reported no positive impact as a result of the trial, with 43 per cent reporting that they had no change in behaviour since the trial began and 34 per cent reporting that they had not engaged in alcohol consumption, illegal drug use or gambling before the trial.

We should also note that Ceduna introduced alcohol restrictions independently of the trial in September 2015 and that the East Kimberley region introduced additional takeaway alcohol management from December 2015. So, without complex analysis, it is hard to know whether it was the trial or something else entirely that is responsible for any of the positive outcomes we currently appear to have. However, more conclusive data was that, in the 12 months after it started, there was a 12 per cent reduction in poker machine revenue in Ceduna and the surrounding local government areas. Yet, even here, I note that there was no equivalent data reported in the East Kimberley region trial site, assuming it was ever collected, and so again it is hard to know whether the trial itself was directly responsible for these outcomes.

There have been no conclusive findings of a reduction in violence or crime at the trial sites, despite the self-reported reductions in gambling and alcohol consumption. I recognise that community perceptions have indicated a decrease in violence and crime, but again we do not yet have hard data to confirm this. Worryingly, domestic violence has in fact increased significantly in the East Kimberley since the introduction of the cashless welfare card. During the Senate inquiry into the bill, the Western Australia Police Force released data on domestic assaults. For the 12 months to June 2016, there were 319 domestic assaults. In the following 12 months, while the card was in operation, there were 508 domestic assaults in Kununurra. As always, we need more information to know the full story. The WA police noted that it is very difficult to fully assess the impact of the card in relation to domestic violence because the Kimberley district revised its approach to include a better first response to domestic violence reports. The police data was available to ORIMA Research when it undertook its analysis of the card, but they chose not to include it in their evaluation report—quite a significant omission. The government must account for the reasons why relevant data was not included in the evaluation.

The Nick Xenophon Team is also concerned to see that the use of methamphetamine, such as ice, appears to have significantly increased amongst participants over the first six months of the trial. We need to know whether the introduction of the card played any part in this. Yet the most concerning finding was that only 27 per cent of family members said that the trial had made their family's life better and 37 per cent had said it had actually made it worse. Amongst the participants interviewed, 22 per cent had said that it had made their lives better but almost half had said that it had made their lives worse. It is one thing to have participants dislike the effects of the card upon their life and their financial freedom, but another thing entirely for their families to also indicate it had actually made the lives of the participants worse.

In summary, the data seeking to track the outcomes of the trial are less than robust and the data surrounding the secondary social and economic impacts are also less than robust. The lesson here is that greater longitudinal data needs to be collected, and more effectively collected, before we can make any final conclusions. Any trial must be supported by what are known as wraparound services—namely, all of the social support programs and services that can leverage any positive outcomes that the trials might possibly produce. For example, there's not much point in hoping the cashless debit cards will restrict illegal drug use without also providing the addiction and rehabilitation support services that address the problems created by addiction withdrawal. In short, interventions should not be considered in isolation from their expected consequences.

I turn to the ALP amendments, which, while well intentioned, will place unreasonable restrictions on a trial that is meant to be responsive and flexible to community needs in relation to wraparound services. As this program is a trial it is necessary for the program to react quickly to community feedback and be able to record the impact of that response. Placing legislative regulation on the trial sites would only slow the process of providing services to the communities or add unnecessary constraints on what services could be provided.

The government is on notice that it must work with the relevant communities to ensure the appropriate wraparound services are provided and funded adequately. The Nick Xenophon Team will closely monitor the continued implementation of these measures and will view it as a deciding factor in any future attempts to expand the card's reach or make the card a permanent fixture.