Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee, , 8:53:30 to 9:06:19
Departmental officials discuss the resumption of social security payment suspensions and cancellations under the Targeted Compliance Framework, detailing the assurance processes and legal compliance measures taken.
Topics: Social services, Employment, Integrity
Speakers: Simon Duggan, Senator Matt O'Sullivan, Unknown Speaker, Fiona Dewar, Lisa Schofield, Senator Marielle Smith
We'll now resume. And I'm calling officers from the department in relation to outcome one employment. Um we have about 10 minutes just under before the break, but I'll go to the opposition and then continue the call afterwards. Senator O'Sullivan.
Yes, I'd like to talk about the uh targeted compliance framework. I appreciate the opening statement you made earlier today, Secretary.
Um the powers that Secretary, you said would resume on the 26th of October, that was the evidence you gave last time. reconnection requirement within four weeks of being notified. And then on the 19th of November, Secretary, you confirmed both would resume on Monday. The evidence you gave uh today, just reference refresh me. What did you say in relation to when it recommenced? And so did that that that then occurred on the 26th?
Yeah, that's correct, Senator. Monday the 26th.
Uh you you said that the provisions were only resumed once you were satisfied. On what date were you satisfied?
So, Senator, I've been um, of course, I mean, maybe to preface my response. I mean, my obligations under Section 7 of the Social Security Act. Um, I have particular responsibilities under that act for the general administration of the Social Security Law as it relates to mutual obligations. I take those responsibilities very seriously, and one of those responsibilities is restoring those elements of the 2CF that have been put on hold as soon as I'm assured that the systems and procedures Um we have established within the department a task force that and that task force now has been in operation for approximately two years, the two sections that I referred to to give me that final assurance that all of the systems elements were in place prior to that recommencement on the Monday. So just gives you a bit of a sense of the frequency of engagement around this to give me that assurance.
Okay, so was it a single moment? There was a single date.
big endeavour for the team uh to be able to get the system back into legal compliance uh over the time period. Anormous amount of work has gone into it. Um and I can go into all of the assurance work that we did if that's of interest to you, Senator. But a huge body of work and I've been very closely engaged all the way through. but the final confirmation occurred the day before.
And are you the delegate uh on the decision or is it a good idea? I am the minister. Okay. I presume you informed the Minister ahead of the announcement.
I'll just check with my colleagues to see whether they've got the date of the written brief. We'll have to take that on notice, Senator.
Okay, thanks. Um in August, the department said that once the work on the human decision making is implemented, uh, a job seeker circumstances will be comprehensively considered before any decision to cancel their payment. Was that in place before cancellations restarted on Monday?
And essentially there were four lines of assurance that were provided to me before I made the final decision to recommence. The first was um this is a this is a complex system. It's a system that is shared with Services Australia but also with the private providers. and of course, in accordance with the the legislative requirements. With providers, but also the departmental staff that would be subsequently involved in decision making. We also, the third line of assurance was we had extensive legal review, audit and assurance processes. And as part of that, I commissioned an in-flight internal audit to critically assess the work of the task force that was putting this together to bring me separate advice on whether or not the task force was delivering on the legal requirements, the system requirements, but also responding to the Ombudsman's recommendations in this regard. So I was getting, if you like, a second stream of advice on this to ensure that I could be absolutely assured that this was all being brought into place with legal requirements.
This now means mutual obligations is able to be properly assured.
So Senator, this was to bring two elements of mutual obligations that had been caused back online. But there are other elements of mutual obligations that have continued, um, which were not in question in terms of the legality of your administration.
Yes, I know that.
So what were those two? Sorry. So those two, just to remind you again. So 42 AG, so this was uh allowing a person's social security participation payment to be suspended for a work refusal failure, but forty-two AM, which allows a person's participation to cancel if they do not meet a reconnection requirement within four weeks.
Um the Ombudsman's recommendation of five days to reconnect before a payment is suspended. In August, the department said it accepted all the Ombudsman's recommendations. So then what was what was your call on that particular point?
Yeah. So Senator, the the Ombudsman provided us with two reports that are relevant. So one on um titled automatic automation in the target of compliance framework when the law is changed, but the system isn't. And a second one on fairness in the target of compliance framework when the decisions are made beyond your control. So you're correct, Senator. Accepting all the Ombudsman's recommendations. Those recommendations, some of them were relevant for the provisions that have now restarted following my recent decision. Other elements are part of a longer term work program. They're not they're not as relevant for the decisions that I just made, but will be relevant to restoring the remaining elements of the targeted compliance framework. Which as I said in my opening statement, we intend to bring back into line in the first quarter of next calendar year.
Yeah, sure. Yeah, and I'll come back after the break. Um if that's right.
Yep.
Thank you. So uh just then on that. Um, are job seekers still able to be suspended on the spot?
Um so Senator, there is a number of elements to the target of compliance framework, a number of provisions that have remained in operation. Um I think we'll I'll just need to ask ask you to be a little bit more specific about is there a specific part of the target of compliance framework that you're referring to then.
Uh just in relation to the five days to reconnect before a payment is suspended. Um the recommendation from the Ombudsman uh in relation to that five days to suspend in August. The department you said that it accepted the Ombudsman's recommendations, but Services Australia marked that as not accepted. So I'm talking about the the ability for design of Senate Services Australia to be able to suspend someone on the spot. Is that not right?
So um Senator Lisa Schofield, Acting Deputy Secretary, Employment and Workforce. I will um ask my colleagues to sort of jump in with further detail, but I I think Senator Jester go to, I think, is driving your question. Um, is that Services Australia?
42 A G and AM.
Yeah, Services Australia, um, because there is sort of both shared and um sort of joint responsibility between um the department and services Australia for the different parts of making the system work. So there were some of the recommendations from the Ombudsman that Services Australia sort of don't need to implement because those powers sit with the department. So it could be that when you're reflecting that Services Australia has said it's not a call for them, it's a call for the department.
Oh, okay.
But could be that actually what they were referring to was actually this is not a power or a function that they hold and it would be a check that's called for the department.
Oh, they're now or come back to us on that.
Yeah.
Their reasons why.
Sorry, Senator Um Fiona, do a um First Assistant Secretary. Um the recommendation you're referring to came out of the second Ombudsman's report where he requested that the viewer and Services Australia review the automatic process to suspend a job seekers income support in the penalty zone, ideally to provide job seekers with five days to reconnect or provide a valid reason for any mutual obligation failure prior to suspension. So to go to the particular and the response from the department and and um Miss Schofield and the Secretary of the United States. Sorry, that this for this department that is a piece of um uh legislation that um this department administers, which is probably gets to why services responded in the way that they did. Um the our response um uh is that effectively any change about the application of um reconnection um time is uh a matter for government um and it sit can't talks to the construct of the targeted compliance framework, um, and it's only in part of the targeted compliance framework, the penalty zone that there is no um uh reconnection time um provided. Sorry, resolution time provided.
Okay. At this point we are due to suspend. So um the committee will now suspend and will reconvene at six fifty.