Parliamentary Committees

Select Committee on Poverty in South Australia

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:31): I move:

That the report of the select committee be noted.

I rise to note the final report of the Select Committee on Poverty in South Australia. The select committee was formed in May 2018 for the purpose of inquiring into and reporting on poverty in South Australia, particularly its extent, nature and what practical measures could be implemented to address it.

Such a topic is, of course, a grand undertaking and so I would like to acknowledge and thank my fellow members who sat on this committee who remain within this parliament: the Hon. Frank Pangallo, the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos, the Hon. Russell Wortley, the Hon. Terry Stephens and, previously on the committee, the Hon. Justin Hanson. I would also like to thank the hardworking committee staff and, in particular, our most recent research officer, Mary-Ann Bloomfield.

The committee received a grand total of 72 written submissions and saw 17 witnesses in this last tranche of work across Adelaide and Ceduna. This particular third report makes 16 recommendations which aim to address issues of poverty within South Australia and, in particular, looking to the Ceduna region where the cashless debit card trial has been underway for some time.

The submissions and evidence we received painted a resounding picture of the failure of the cashless debit card in this region. It was demonstrated to the committee that the cashless debit card trial not only failed to achieve its goals but, in fact, lessened the quality of life for its participants. The trial was rolled out to address the issues of alcohol, drugs, gambling, financial planning and money management as well as crime and family violence, health and wellbeing. These were the purported aims.

However, the committee found little evidence that the trial helped curb any of these issues. In fact, the committee found the Orima evaluation used by the government, the federal government, to claim the trial had been successful so far included inflated and skewed data simply to justify the continued existence of the trial. Instead of helping the people around the Ceduna region, the committee found that the trial further entrenched the stigma behind poverty within the region and made the purchase even of essential goods difficult and stressful.

Witnesses reported feeling as though they had no autonomy or control over their lives. Such feelings have been linked to an increase in mental health problems for those placed on the trial. The committee also heard many reports, particularly of Aboriginal people, feeling targeted and discriminated against by the manner in which the scheme was implemented. One witness told the committee that the cashless debit card was yet another version of Aboriginal people being 'in chains', only those chains are a 'little grey card'.

The cashless debit trial also failed to take into account many of the realities of living in poverty in our state, as seen in its assumed access to and knowledge of the needed technologies. It also neglected to address the underlying societal issues that lead to and reinforce poverty. Despite all of these failures, the trial has of course been extended several times, much to the detriment of this community. For these reasons, the committee has recommended that the government of South Australia, through the national cabinet, call on the federal government to end the cashless debit card trial in Ceduna by the end of next year, not to continue this trial.

The region of Ceduna struggles heavily with the burden of poverty, and it is currently not being supported by the government in the way it needs. The submissions and witness statements we received echoed this, pointing to a variety of measures that the government of South Australia ought to take to assist in alleviating poverty in the area. This would be far more effective than the cashless debit card trial has been.

These measures include the development and implementation of a long stay drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre in the Ceduna region as opposed to forcing people to travel long distances. The current closest centre is quite a distance away. As well as this, additional and continued funding and support needs to be invested in the existing programs in the region.

Housing and homelessness were identified by the committee as a large issue for this region, and it is essential that there be an increase in public housing tenancies. The committee was advised that a specific proportion of this housing should be designated for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents, who are disproportionately impacted by poverty in this region—indeed, across the country. Further focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents is also needed at multiple levels, and this was frequently raised with the committee.

The committee explored recommendations that the government be willing to work with community leaders, with elders, with the community as a whole, in the development of future plans for the region. The committee particularly explored the development of further employment opportunities within this region. It was recommended that the government work with the Indigenous community to develop training courses, employment programs and, of course, the unique tourism opportunities that would help not only with skill development and creating jobs but also make it easier for Ceduna's Aboriginal population to lead good and fulfilling lives.

On behalf of the committee I sincerely thank those stakeholders and interested parties who took part, whether they presented as witnesses or prepared submissions. We certainly appreciated their time and expertise. This report is a small step towards improving the lives of those living in poverty; however, there is so much more work to be done. It is a step towards listening to their voices and needs, rather than prescribing compulsory income management as a panacea. We know that particular approach has further entrenched the impacts and stigma of poverty.

As a state, as members of parliament, we need to take a human approach to poverty and recognise that the wide range of factors that influence and feed into the poverty cycle are not intractable, that we can help empower people to combat it. I believe this government can truly make a difference for the people of Ceduna and do the right thing in opposing the cashless debit card continuing in our state, instead prioritising the needs of the community and making good on the agreements and promises that were made to this community in exchange for the implementation of this trial. With that, I commend the report to the council.

The Hon. I. PNEVMATIKOS (17:38): I rise to speak on the final report of the Select Committee on Poverty in South Australia. The final report of the committee looks at the cashless debit card trial, which is currently continuing in the Ceduna region. This report details what the committee heard from individuals, non-government organisations and academics, and the shared stories from those with lived experience in Ceduna and the Yalata Aboriginal community.

The cashless debit card, or CDC, trial was imposed on the Ceduna region in 2016 by the Turnbull government. It was promised it would assist people out of poverty, improve employment opportunities, decrease alcohol, drug and gambling issues, decrease instances of crime and improve housing arrangements. However, as the report states, the impact of the CDC trial has shown no improvement to the lives and wellbeing of those who have participated.

The CDC trial is compulsory for anyone who receives Centrelink welfare. This includes Newstart, Youth Allowance, the single parent payment and some disability support pensions. Twenty per cent of the payment is deposited into the recipient's bank account and can be withdrawn and freely used. The remaining 80 per cent of the payment is placed on the CDC. This money cannot be withdrawn and does not allow for purchases of alcohol, illicit drugs, gambling products and some gift cards.

Implementation of these control mechanisms has not achieved outcomes foreshadowed by the federal government. In fact, many of the participants said they were worse of or life has become more difficult. This one-size-fits-all approach fails to acknowledge the compounding effects of poverty and welfare and further harms communities that are already disadvantaged, marginalised and discriminated against.

A lack of consultation and evaluation throughout the process of the CDC trial has made for an ineffective and unethical program that leaves the Ceduna community without proper support. Since the beginning of the trial, the commonwealth Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 has been altered not only to increase powers to the Department of Social Services and the Minister for Families and Social Services to oversee the program but to abolish the requirement for an independent evaluation of that program.

Acknowledging the federal government's lack of accountability, private organisations such as universities have heeded the call to assess the effectiveness of the CDC trial. These research papers were considered by the committee, and the findings were almost identical. The committee has seen a large body of research suggesting the CDC trial has further discriminated and entrenched poverty as a result of the adverse effects of the program in Ceduna. The program's logistical issues are evident in the plethora of technological barriers to the CDC system, which fails to consider common barriers for participants in accessing funds such as EFTPOS, unavailability and card decline failures. Further, it excludes participants from cash economies in markets and small businesses.

The CDC trial further fails to recognise that participants may not have reliable access to internet and updated devices, which will bar them from viewing their account information. The Australian government claims the CDC trial creates a flow-on impact into the workforce participation through the reduction of harm in communities by barring participants from purchasing the alcohol, illicit drugs and gambling. This approach does not address, however, the lack of job opportunities in Ceduna and leads participants to circumventing the program.

The CDC trial fails to address the underlying issues of addiction, such as grief, trauma, poverty and homelessness. The committee has found it increases risk to participants who circumvent the program, who expose themselves to risks in order to get cash. Five years into the program, the Australian government does not have enough evidence to show that the harm caused by alcohol, illicit drugs and gambling has been reduced.

Flowing on from these unaddressed issues, crime rates have plateaued and, in some instances, increased. The committee heard concerning evidence of the elderly being targets for theft and assault over cash. The committee heard that the CDC trial has caused significant difficulty for participants with existing housing arrangements, particularly with fund transfers and cash only arrangements, exacerbating housing insecurity and poverty. Similarly, the cashless card is causing the children of participants to go without, as parents struggle to provide cash for consumables and school excursions.

As 75 per cent of the CDC trial participants are Indigenous, it is impossible to see this policy as anything else but discriminatory towards Indigenous people. The program perpetuates rhetoric of welfare recipients being incapable of looking after themselves and prone to addiction. Participants feel embarrassment, stigma and shame when they are outed as being part of the program every time they purchase something.

As the evidence suggests, there was no benefit to those who were forced to be part of the CDC trial. After hearing the evidence, we the members of the committee were disturbed to hear the language used by supporters of the CDC. Supporters portrayed the CDC as benevolent or philanthropic and used words to describe the CDC such as 'supportive', 'stabilising' or 'helpful'.

These comments are dangerous and fail to acknowledge the accumulating issues these disadvantaged communities face with the addition of the card. This simplistic view on welfare is degrading and dehumanising to those who are part of the scheme. Unfortunately, even after independent reports and constant backlash from advocates and those trialling the scheme, the federal government has continued its rhetoric and committed to continue the trial. You cannot take the human element out of an economic solution. Without considering issues holistically, there will not be any benefit to the wellbeing of people.

This reminds me of a fantastic episode of the satirical comedy show Utopia. In the episode it is suggested a new ID card tracking the location and spending of people is trialled in an effort to benefit government outcomes. When it is suggested that the ID card be trialled in Canberra, which would include staffers, members of parliament and lobbyists, the idea is instantly thrown out. It is scary how many parallels can be drawn between that show and the way this government operates, but on this issue, consider politicians having parameters on their personal spending.

Politicians receive their salary from taxpayers, the same as welfare recipients. If the same limits were to be placed on us, there would be uproar. In fact, it would not happen because there is no way anyone in this place or federally would agree to that, so why is it okay for the federal government to do that to others? The privilege that abounds in this place and the degrading initiatives government imposes on others is frightening.

This report has come at an apt time. Last week was Anti-Poverty Week. The Anti-Poverty Network and its adjoining organisations work to advocate for solutions that create structural changes and involve the perspectives of those with lived experience. This program flies in the face of what those activists and advocates are asking for. Poverty is a policy decision. Poverty is a political decision. The rate needs to be raised and the CDC scheme must be stopped.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (17:47): I need to make a brief contribution. I attended most of the committee hearings, I think; however, when we signed off on the report I was unavailable. I certainly encouraged the committee to deliver a report so it was not me holding it up; however, I do need to put on the record that I support the federal government's policy on the card. I know from all the evidence we heard that it certainly needs tweaking and there were a lot of concerns raised that concerned me but I am sure it could be improved. I would like to thank all of those people who came to give evidence.

I have heard from many people from that part of the world, not just with this committee but in other committees that I have sat on and other visits that I have had to the Ceduna region. There are many different points of view and I am respectful of all of them; however, I need to put on the record that I do support the federal government's position on this.

Motion carried.