Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025

I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives; however, we do have significant concerns about aspects of the legislation that warrant further scrutiny. At all times you must remember that Australia’s social services safety net is one of the strongest and most generous in the world, but it’s not self-sustaining. It must be managed responsibly, because it’s funded by Australian taxpayers—people who work hard, take risks and carry the task of supporting our social security system.

Few countries in the world provide the kind of social safety net that we enjoy here in Australia. It’s something we should be proud of, but it’s also something we must safeguard and protect. Our safety net is not funded by government; it is funded by real people: small-business owners, primary producers and those who work on the front line of our essential services. It is funded by small businesses that take risks every single day. They invest their savings, their homes and their livelihoods into building something for themselves, their families and their communities. These are the people who drive innovation and create jobs, who build the very opportunities that allow our economy to thrive. It’s funded by our primary producers, the men and women who work the land through fire, drought and floods, who keep Australians fed and who export beyond our shores, strengthening our national economy. It’s funded by those on the front line, the nurses who worked the night shift, the teachers who shape the minds of our children and the police who put themselves in harm’s way to keep our community safe.

Every dollar spent on social security is a dollar that someone else has earned. That reality imposes a clear responsibility on all of us in this place. It means that every measure, every amendment and every program must be justified. It must be fair, it must be sustainable and it must serve the purpose of helping Australians in genuine need while maintaining the integrity of the system for the future.

We also have a duty to our future generations. The decisions we make today about the structure and sustainability of the welfare system will determine the cost that future Australians will bear. Our focus must be on ensuring that more Australians are working, contributing to and strengthening the economy, not on keeping people connected to welfare unnecessarily. The welfare system must always be fit for purpose; it must evolve to meet tomorrow’s challenges, not remain anchored in the past. Income support should support a strong and sustainable safety net, protecting our most vulnerable citizens, supporting those experiencing hardship, and providing clear and practical pathways to independence and self-reliance.

The coalition’s attention remains on creating jobs and getting Australians back into work, because we know that getting a job is the single best way to improve the living standards of individuals and of their families. That principle has guided our approach to social policy, and continues to guide our thinking in opposition. And, of course, these priorities are all the more critical during what has become an enduring Labor induced cost-of-living crisis, which is not going away; a time when Australian households are struggling to keep up with rising expenses, high interest rates and stagnant wages.

When in government, the coalition demonstrated disciplined and responsible economic management. Through that approach, we were able to deliver the largest permanent increase to the jobseeker payment at that time, ensuring that while there was a safety net for those in need, focus remained on supporting people into employment. In April 2021, the coalition increased working-age payment rates, including jobseeker, by $50 a fortnight. We also permanently increased the income-free area to $150 a fortnight, giving jobseekers greater flexibility and incentive to take on work as they re-entered the workforce. And during the height of the pandemic, one of the greatest economic and social challenges of our generation, the coalition government provided $32 billion emergency support payments to help Australians get through. This is the record of a coalition government that understands the balance between compassion and responsibility, between helping those that need help and ensuring that the system remains fair to those who fund it.

Turning to the bill before the House, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 contains four schedules that amend a number of acts, including A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999, Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, the Social Security Act 1991 and the Student Assistance Act 1973. These technical amendments in the bill have significant consequences for how social security payments are administered and how debts and undetermined debts are treated. The bill also includes provisions providing clarity to income apportionment, a practice introduced under Labor.

The bill seeks to do several things. It sets out preliminary and definitional matters, as well as income apportionment method statements. It validates income apportionment as a method of apportioning employment income in relation to entitlement periods before 7 December 2020. It also clarifies the lawful methods of apportioning employment income when determining debts or rates of payment for periods before that date.

The bill expands the instances in which the special circumstances waiver can be applied to waive debts incurred under the relevant acts. The bill increases the threshold for waiving a small debt to $250 and provides for that threshold to be indexed annually to the CPI. It also provides for a one-off waiver of the Commonwealth’s right to recover small undetermined debts worth less than $250 that are currently recorded in Services Australia’s system but have yet to be raised. The number of undetermined debts has increased substantially in recent years due to COVID measures and the pausing of debts during the pandemic and times of natural disaster.

Another significant measure is the establishment of the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. The scheme will provide resolution payments to people whose debts were affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. The bill gives the minister power to determine matters relating to the scheme through legislative instrument, and it provides for a new special appropriation to fund these resolution payments. While these measures are significant, they are not without concern.

The first issue relates to the process by which this legislation has been developed. It appears that the income apportionment measures have been informed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s own-motion investigation and recommendations, yet we are told that there was no direct consultation with the Ombudsman in the development of this legislation. The Ombudsman instead used the Senate committee process to contribute to the bill. That’s an extraordinary omission. If the measures stem from the Ombudsman’s own findings, it would be reasonable to expect the government to have engaged directly with that office to ensure the legislation aligns with those recommendations.

The second issue: the timing of this bill raises serious questions. The government has waited until the tail end of the sitting calendar to bring this legislation forward. As a result, scrutiny has been rushed, with only a single day allocated for Senate committee examination. That inquiry heard almost exclusively from social service advocacy and not-for-profit organisations. Many other key stakeholders were simply not consulted. This narrow consultation raises legitimate concerns about how many voices the government listened to when preparing the bill.

The Ombudsman, in its submission to the Senate inquiry, highlighted a serious omission—namely, that the issue of remediation for individuals who have been criminally convicted in relation to debts that were invalidly calculated using income apportionment is not addressed in the bill. That is not what we would call a minor point. It goes to the heart of fairness, accountability and justice. If the government acknowledges that income apportionment was used unlawfully for years, then the question of how that impacts those who face prosecution or conviction as a result cannot simply be left unanswered.

Further, the bill leaves many operational details unresolved. It’s not clear how the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme will interact with the Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration, the longstanding framework for compensating individuals adversely affected by administrative errors. Much, it seems, is being left to legislative instruments—we hear this a lot from this government—meaning that critical decisions about the design and implementation of the scheme will be made outside the direct scrutiny of the parliament. That is deeply concerning. Due to the absence of these essential details in the primary legislation, parliament’s capacity to properly scrutinise the scheme has been limited. The coalition has been advised that schedule 3, which establishes the resolution scheme, will cost approximately $97.2 million over the forward estimates. Once the delegated legislation is tabled, we will closely examine and consider those instruments to ensure that the scheme is fair to those affected by income apportionment and fair to taxpayers who foot bill.

There are also unresolved questions about how the special circumstances waiver will operate in practice. The bill provides little detail about the measures, procedures and thresholds that will guide Services Australia in deciding whether special circumstances do exist. Without clear criteria, there is a real risk of inconsistent decision-making and unequal treatment of applicants. We must ask: how will Services Australia seek information from victims-survivors of coercive social security debt, and how will staff be supported to make informed and compassionate decisions? These are not academic questions; they go to the heart of how the law will affect real people.

Minister Plibersek, in her second reading speech, said that existing safeguards would be strengthened to prevent manipulation of the waiver system, yet no detail has been provided on what these strengthened safeguards will look like or how they will operate to prevent misuse or manipulation of the social security safety net. These are issues that must be addressed before the parliament can have full confidence in the practical effect of these amendments.

As the coalition, we will continue to be constructive where we can. We recognise that the bill contains technical corrections and seeks to address longstanding administrative challenges. But we will also continue to hold the government to account on how it develops and implements these measures. The Australian people deserve transparency, accountability and confidence that their parliament is doing its job. We will not oppose this legislation in the House today. However, our concerns remain about the absence of essential operational details on the income apportionment resolution scheme from this primary legislation. As outlined earlier in my contribution, the coalition will closely examine and consider the resolution scheme legislative instrument once it is tabled. We will insist that the government explain how the resolution scheme will operate in practice, how fairness will be guaranteed and how integrity of the bills measures will be maintained across all aspects of the social security system. Every dollar spent through the social security system is a dollar earned by hardworking Australians. It our responsibility—indeed, our duty—to ensure those dollars are spent justly and wisely; in ways that strengthen rather than weaken the foundations of our safety net; and that any fraud is appropriately dealt with. Above all, our task in this place is to ensure that Australia’s welfare system remains one that supports people in genuine need, provides real pathways to independence and sustains itself for the generations yet to come. That is the coalition’s enduring commitment to fairness, to responsibility and to the integrity of the Australian social security system.