Why social security is in dire need of reform
In Australia, social security is most commonly seen through the work of Centrelink, a Services Australia program that administers social welfare payments to eligible individuals. This includes individuals that are experiencing family, domestic and sexual violence in Australia. A 2019 report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare found that 2.2 million Australians have experienced physical or sexual violence from a current or previous partner. With so many individuals experiencing violence, it is extremely important that Australia’s social security system is able to effectively meet the needs of the most vulnerable.
The need for reform:
Australia’s current social security framework is deficient in certain areas. Lack of resourcing and oversight has meant that some individuals in situations of domestic violence are still unable to effectively access their right to social security. For example, a domestic violence victim-survivor and mother of three had her welfare payments stopped because her abusive partner had contacted Centrelink claiming that her three children were no longer living with her. Instead of confirming with the mother that her children were living elsewhere, Centrelink had immediately stopped the payments.
It is not uncommon for those in domestic violence situations to also be subjected to financial abuse. There are many cases where victims are completely at the whim of their abusers and are unable to access their finances despite money being held in joint accounts. For example, a case brought by Illawarra Legal Centre involved a woman who was barred from accessing Jobseeker payments because Centrelink deemed that the joint assets between her and her abusive partner were too large to make her eligible. Economic Justice Australia (EJA), a not-for-profit organisation which advocates for better social security laws in Australia, released a report which stated that this method of calculating payment eligibility, “effectively tethers the women to their abuser, even in circumstances where income is not shared between the couple”.
In response to this deficiency, EJA recommends passing clearer legislation under Section 24 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) to ensure that family or domestic violence can be used as a grounds for treating someone as not part of a couple for social security purposes.
Another issue is the difficulty accessing social security payments in instances where the individual is a migrant. An example includes a migrant single mother who was unable to access Centrelink payments because of her visa status, despite the fact that her previous partner had been abusive and that she had no income.
These examples show that social security legislation in Australia is “out of touch with the nuances of family, domestic and sexual violence”. Whilst such legislation may work in theory, in practice, many vulnerable women and children are left without the social security that they need to survive.
The need for action:
Despite the need for better economic security for Australia’s most marginalised, the draft national plan released by the former Coalition government not too long ago barely made any reference to social security.
What is needed are laws that better uphold the right to social security in Australia. As the new Labour government begins to settle in, we can only remain hopeful that they are able to effectively prioritise social security laws and help the many victim-survivors who have been left unseen for too long.
In Australia, social security is most commonly seen through the work of Centrelink, a Services Australia program that administers social welfare payments to eligible individuals. This includes individuals that are experiencing family, domestic and sexual violence in Australia. A 2019 report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare found that 2.2 million Australians have experienced physical or sexual violence from a current or previous partner. With so many individuals experiencing violence, it is extremely important that Australia’s social security system is able to effectively meet the needs of the most vulnerable.
The need for reform:
Australia’s current social security framework is deficient in certain areas. Lack of resourcing and oversight has meant that some individuals in situations of domestic violence are still unable to effectively access their right to social security. For example, a domestic violence victim-survivor and mother of three had her welfare payments stopped because her abusive partner had contacted Centrelink claiming that her three children were no longer living with her. Instead of confirming with the mother that her children were living elsewhere, Centrelink had immediately stopped the payments.
It is not uncommon for those in domestic violence situations to also be subjected to financial abuse. There are many cases where victims are completely at the whim of their abusers and are unable to access their finances despite money being held in joint accounts. For example, a case brought by Illawarra Legal Centre involved a woman who was barred from accessing Jobseeker payments because Centrelink deemed that the joint assets between her and her abusive partner were too large to make her eligible. Economic Justice Australia (EJA), a not-for-profit organisation which advocates for better social security laws in Australia, released a report which stated that this method of calculating payment eligibility, “effectively tethers the women to their abuser, even in circumstances where income is not shared between the couple”.
In response to this deficiency, EJA recommends passing clearer legislation under Section 24 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) to ensure that family or domestic violence can be used as a grounds for treating someone as not part of a couple for social security purposes.
Another issue is the difficulty accessing social security payments in instances where the individual is a migrant. An example includes a migrant single mother who was unable to access Centrelink payments because of her visa status, despite the fact that her previous partner had been abusive and that she had no income.
These examples show that social security legislation in Australia is “out of touch with the nuances of family, domestic and sexual violence”. Whilst such legislation may work in theory, in practice, many vulnerable women and children are left without the social security that they need to survive.
The need for action:
Despite the need for better economic security for Australia’s most marginalised, the draft national plan released by the former Coalition government not too long ago barely made any reference to social security.
What is needed are laws that better uphold the right to social security in Australia. As the new Labour government begins to settle in, we can only remain hopeful that they are able to effectively prioritise social security laws and help the many victim-survivors who have been left unseen for too long.
