Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 10:09:39 to 10:19:15
Inquiry into the 'program of support' requirement for Disability Support Pension (DSP) applicants, focusing on safeguards for people with intellectual disabilities and potential payment penalties.
Topics: Health, Human rights
Speakers: Senator Penny Allman-Payne, Matt Flavel, Ben Peoples, Unknown Speaker, Michael Lye, Ellie Whiteaker
Uh thanks very much, Chair. Um at the um hearing for the review into the Social Security Administration, legislation amendment, income management and enhanced income management instrument 2026 last month. The Department testified that they hadn't they had not received a change in mandate to end compulsory income management. Despite this, the department also gave evidence that they hadn't progressed any further consultations since mid-2025. What work, if any, beyond the most recent round of consultations has been done since then to progress that mandate?
Senator, this is an outcome two issue, which we're happy to answer, but if we finished outcome one.
Okay, I can put that to one side and I'll come back to it.
Thank you, Senator Allman-Payne.
Yep, I've got another block. Thank you. That's a good point. That can be my last one. Okay. Um those two are for outcome two, then, which means I only have one left for this outcome, Chair, and then my the rest of my questions will be the other one. So how many people with disability who have been assessed as not meeting the DSP eligibility criteria have been required to complete a programme of support before they can qualify for the DSP in the last 12 months.
I'm not sure. Yeah, I'm not sure I've got that to hand, sorry, Senator.
Alright, could you take that on notice? Um how does the department ensure that the programme of support is appropriate and accessible for people with disability who may require additional support to understand requirements, communicate with employment service providers, attend appointments and complete activities?
So I probably reiterate the the comment that the minister made earlier that there are specific supports available from Servers Australia where people are seeking further information about their obligations, for instance. So in the circumstances where somebody applies for DSP, they have the requisite number of points, but not enough to enable them to get on to DSP. They're required to undertake the programme of support. There are various mechanisms through which Servers Australia can provide additional assistance to people, particularly where they have disability to ensure they understand those requirements to make referrals as they need to is to ensure that people have the necessary supports.
On notice, Mr. Flavel, would I be able to get a list and a description of what those supports are?
Sure, yeah, absolutely.
Alright, thank you. What safeguards are in place to ensure that a person's disability related barriers to navigating or completing a program of support are not interpreted as a failure to participate, resulting in payment suspension or other penalties?
Well a large number of people who are on the programme of support will meet that requirement by being part of being a participant in inclusive employment Australia. And obviously, inclusive employment Australia being a specific disability employment service is pretty well attuned to engaging with clients with a wide range of disabilities.
It's another thing to have safeguards written into policy. Are there are there safeguards written into that to make sure that people are not being penalised as a consequence of their disability?
I'm just not sure what you mean by either safeguards or penal penalised. There isn't there isn't a particular penalty. Obviously, we would want to ensure that those people can engage with those employment services providers facing any particular barriers. But I do know that.
And who assesses that? Is it the employment services provider or the department?
It will be well, I mean, if somebody is uh engaging in a in a um employment services program, and particularly if they are in the inclusive employment Australia program, they'll have requirements around meaningful engagement, as you probably know. That's a different arrangement than was previously in place under the Disability Employment Service. As a result of that, we've seen a substantial reduction in the number of compliance related activities that have taken place since the new programme has been rolled out because it's less focused on compliance and more about actually engaging with a person and ensuring that assistance being provided in whatever barriers they may have in gaining employment?
Just in response to when you said you're not sure what I'm talking about in terms of penalties, I'm talking about payment suspensions generally because some people with disability may not be able to meet the requirement because of their disability, and some of them are getting their payments suspended. So is that is the department doing any work around looking at where whether there are instances of that occurring and what potentially needs to change to prevent that?
Well, we I mean, you know, there are 250,000 people in inclusive employment Australia, so there's a very um broad range of providers and a system that's already operating for people with disability who are engaging in employment services. Um we engage very regularly with stakeholders with disability representative organisations if they're raising issues about um you know systemic instances of where those systems are failing. I think you could expect the department was in would be engaging with that pretty strongly.
Um what consideration, if any, has the department given to whether the programme of support requirement is an effective and appropriate test of work capacity for people with intellectual disability, particularly those who've been assessed as having substantial functional limitations, but don't meet the DSP's manifest eligibility criteria.
Um so that's we obviously work uh and look really closely at a range of settings um for for DSP recipients, including programme of support. Um we've been engaging with um stakeholders to hear feedback on that and and um recognise that um economic justice Australia is a stakeholder that's provided a whole range of feedback to the department um which we look at we consider um as part of um kind of ongoing programme monitoring as well as um for future policy advice that we might provide to government?
Is there any uh work being undertaken at the moment in relation to that issue?
Uh we're regularly engaging with Economic Justice Australia on this issue and um uh we'll be meeting with them quite shortly about that.
I take that to mean there is work going on?
Uh yes.
Sorry, I think I poke over you with the delay.
Uh sorry, yes, we are working with Economic Justice Australia on on this issue and sharing um well taking their feedback and and looking at um how the programme's operating.
All right, um my final question, and then I think it's time because then I'll just go to outcome two. Um what changes, if any, is the department considering to ensure that people with intellectual disability are not left on lower income support payments for extended periods because they cannot satisfy the DSP's evidentiary requirements or complete a programme of support.
Well, I think in um in the way that the DSP works and the programme of support, we're always engaging with particularly representative bodies. Uh so you've um specifically citing people with intellectual disability about whether there needs to be sort of further tweaks to the system arrangements to ensure that those people don't end up in a place they shouldn't be?
Just in relation to that, my understanding is that just in relation um to intellectual disabilities, there's more than 10,000 or iEA, there's more than 10,000 payment suspensions a month. Uh and economic inclusion, sorry, include economic justice Australia and Inclusion Australia actually saying that it needs to be abolished. Are you aware of that feedback from them?
Sorry, what what needs to be abolished, Senator?
Um the programme of support for people with those those sorts of disabilities.
Uh well, I mean it's you know been long-standing government policy that where people don't meet the requirements of DSP, they are required to engage in that program of support. If they do meet that um requirement, then they can actually get access to the DSP beyond that um once they've undertaken that programme of support.
Um I know that I've been given the answer a couple of times tonight that it's been long-standing government policy. Uh I am just going to go back to the fact that when we're talking about ask Izzy with Senator Umator Rustin, Senator Gallagher said that you can't just keep doing things because that's the way you've always done them. So I'm wondering if maybe we could think about that in relation to some of these programs of support and maybe raising the rate, but that's the end of my questions for outcome one, Chair.
Thank you, Senator Almond Payne.