Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 9:04:30 to 9:19:19
The Minister discusses procurement rules and value-for-money assessments regarding the government's ongoing support for InfoExchange and the Ask Izzy platform.
Topics: Social services, Procurement
Speakers: Hon Anne Ruston, Hon Katy Gallagher, Michael Lye, Ellie Whiteaker, Senator Penny Allman-Payne
Yeah. So as I said before, um I'm actually asking it for a different reason, and I respect that Services Australia had a particular reason for using this. Um I think this is a broader issue in terms of the social services portfolio, hence the reason that I've come here to ask it. So well, I I suppose the um so the question then is uh maybe this is a question for you, Minister. Is is it the intention of the government to no longer use um info exchange and and ask Is E um as a as a tool, government tool?
So I understand that Department of Veterans Affairs have an arrangement with InfoExchange. Um I you know, which I'm not I mean, obviously I don't have responsibility for that area, but I understand there is arrangement in place there. The uh services Australia's advice to me is that in relation to the cost of that uh agreement, they could fund 12 agent and access points around Australia for the same value of that of that contract. And so their advice, very clear advice to me, even though it's not a decision of government, it's a procurement uh decision which ministers are not involved in that it it did not represent value for money for the the cost of using that service. Now I'm getting a lot of correspondence from members of parliament about that. I'm you know, obviously undertaking to reply uh to some of the issues that have been raised and invest, you know, interrogating that with Services Australia, uh, but that's the advice uh to me at this point in time.
Um so back to my actual question. Um are you aware of what Commonwealth Government Agencies currently use um the services of Ask Izzy? You mentioned the Veterans Affairs. Are you aware of others?
I'm not but I'm not responsible for those other areas. Okay. I I am aware that there is an arrangement with Veterans Affairs.
Yep. I mean the only reason that I that I'm I'm particularly keen to ask this is that it if you go on, and and I have to a number of government websites, um, more information, they're directed to go to Ask Izzy. The Department of the Services Australia website still says um to go to Ask Easy. Um, you know, the Department of Treasury, the Department of Social Services when it comes to emergency relief. Um, you know, if you're homeless is through my government um Ask Izzy, uh the Department um the Australian Anti-Slavery Commission says go to Ask Easy. Um the e-Safety Commissioner says to go to Ask Easy Um the you know support for people who are financially socially disadvantaged go to Ask Easy. The CARE Gateway go to Ask Izzy. Um, you know, so there are a whole heap of places, and they're just a few that I looked up. Um, you know, Treasury, Defence, Social Services, MyGov, Australia Anti-Slavery Commissioner, Australian Financial Security Authority, Safety Commissioner, CARE Gateway, MyAge Care, Modern Slavery Australia, all of them on their websites are saying go to Ask Easy in order to navigate to find services in the area that somebody is seeking information on those websites. So that's why I didn't just go to Services Australia, Minister, because it is a is obviously it is more general. Um, given this was originally a program that was funded through social services. Uh I'm I'm just keen to understand um, you know, is there any process of reconsideration about the broader application of this that is continuing to be used by the government that your government would be prepared to reconsider?
Well, I can't speak to what other agencies are doing in relation to Services Australia. Uh I think the cost rose, my understanding was I think it was higher than the 2.3 million for the 18-month contract, and they took they did an assessment on value for money and made a decision not to continue with that. Now, what other agencies do, and if they are referring, because I think InfoExchange said if Services Australia was using them, they needed to pay, which is why they entered into that original agreement. If other agencies are using them, then I I'm not in a position to answer about that. As I said in my answer earlier to you, uh I have got a lot of letters from members of Parliament and I think from some community organisations around securing funding for info exchange. Um I think what I said is relevant, even if uh there was a you know a spare two or three million dollars uh to provide, there would have to be a full procurement process undertaken. It wouldn't be a matter of just entering into an agreement again. Now people are raising issues with me, I'm interrogating that with Services Australia as you would expect.
Yep. So I suppose that it's really a question I understand what you've said in relation to the particular issue with Services Australia, but is the government open to a different funding mechanism? I maybe Mr. Lye. Understanding how your agency operates. I mean, are there any funding streams within the Department of Social Services that would enable the provision of this kind of navigation tool for more vulnerable Australians, which obviously social service has a responsibility, that's your core business, to be able to rather than just a simple you know supply agreement for usage that provides a sort of a sustainable operation for this service going forward. I mean, bearing in mind, my understanding is that Ask Izzy or info system, no info exchange only asks for about 25% or seek for about 25% of their funding to come from sources other than their own philanthropic and sponsorship sources. Is there any other alternative means by which a different type of funding arrangement might be able to be facilitated through Services Australia?
Senator, we don't have an immediate funding source, but I think what sits behind Services Australia's analysis is really saying that with the change in technology.
So I should just be the great manager, Mr. Leigh, I'm not asking about Services Australia, I'm actually asking about you.
I know you're not, but I think that the Services Australia analysis about the change in technology and the way people can access information independently from a variety of sources means that the fundamental technology, what what a product that has been very useful over time, it doesn't necessarily represent value for money now for government. Okay, so we can't we cannot ignore that services Australia analysis, and that's just the changing nature of technology where people can self-source the kind of information that previously Ask Izzy has curated for us.
So you are you saying to me that you believe to a large extent that that the service that's provided from Ask Izzy is now obsolete.
Well that that's the nature of the conversation that we have had with Impo Exchange has been along those lines that that we need to kind of for it to be to meet the sort of value for money test, which Service Australia has kind of done the analysis really for everybody on that that we would need to think differently about that that their technology because you know I say that we respect the organisation, it's not a case that we we don't want to help. It's it's that it's hard to make that value for money test for government.
So are you going to take um the Ask Izzy um logo and link off your service social services pages? So I think well, if Ask Izzy ask them to, I'm no, I don't think Ask Is he's asking them to, it's just it seems it seems to me that we've got a situation where the government has across across the government, and as I've said I've listed a number of agencies here that have been quite happy to use this service that has been largely philanthropically funded, um, with the exception I acknowledge of the generosity of the funding that's it's received through various means through the federal government. Um quite happy to have used it, and now when it's decided it's just you know, found something else that can replace it, you're still continuing to use the services, continuing to have the links on multiple government websites,
but you're in effect saying my understanding I can answer for Services Australia is that uh there's been correspondence with the company uh which gives it permission to retain the links on public-facing websites.
Oh no, I'm not suggesting that you're doing it illegally or doing anything you shouldn't be doing. All I'm saying is that you know this is an organisation that has been vested and now you still have to use make procurement decisions like ministers
do not. I understand the issues that have been raised about Ask Izzy, we're exploring some of those issues that have been raised, but you also have to accept that that departments have to make these decisions about what works for them. Now I am told the agency's own service finder website far exceeded click-throughs than to compare to the the uh service that we've been talking about over the last 12 months to 30th September. The agency service finder had a hundred and ninety-three thousand page views uh at that time. So I mean I think there's always good arguments to keep doing things the way you've always done them and to fund things the way you've always funded, but also we have to ask departments you know to manage within their own resources for what's going, you know, how they deliver services, and that may change from time to time. Like, you know, and sometimes that's really hard, but I I'm looking at the correspondence, there's obviously a you know, a well-organised campaign to around Ask Izzy. I understand that I'm looking at the issues that are raised through that, and I'm continuing to discuss with Services Australia.
Okay, so can I take it from that that you that there is ongoing action afoot and the issue is still being investigated?
I have I have to well, not from Services Australia's point of view, they have made a decision. I have been written to where a number of issues have been raised with me from members of parliament uh and from community organisations, and my job is to interrogate that with Services Australia, which I I am and will do before I reply.
Okay, well, um I suppose given you got action afoot, um, we'll wait to see what you come back with. So thank you.
Thank you very much. Uh that brings us to the end of cross portfolio. Uh whole of portfolio and corporate matters. Uh, and I invite officers in relation to outcome one to come to the table. We might just briefly uh suspend for a couple of minutes while I just confer with my colleagues. Your patience, um in conferring with my colleagues on the committee, um I'm gonna uh we are going to suggest that we push through the dinner break um with an aim to finish by about 8.30, but we will reassess that just after seven to make sure we're on track, and if not then we'll have dinner then. But we're very confident that we'll be able to work through.
We're happy to facilitate that, but yeah, I think a reassessment at a point in time.
Um, in that case, uh we're gonna do 10 minute question blocks. I will be firm with the 10 minutes. Um, and we'll begin with Senator Allman-Payne Pat.
Um Thanks very much, Chair.