Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1694232666634.pdf (Australia)
Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 Enquiries regarding this submission can be directed to: Debra Parnell Manager, Policy and Advocacy Dr Sebastian Cordoba AASW Senior Policy Advisor – RMIT Industry Fellow 2 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 The Australian Association of Social Workers The Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) is the professional body representing more than 12,000 social workers throughout Australia.
We set the benchmark for professional education and practice in social work, and advocate on matters of human rights, discrimination, and matters that influence people’s quality of life.

The social work profession Social work is a tertiary qualified profession recognised internationally that pursues social justice and human rights.

Social workers aim to enhance the quality of life of every member of society and empower them to develop their full potential.
Principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversity are central to the profession, and are underpinned by theories of social work, social sciences, humanities and Indigenous knowledges.

Professional social workers consider the relationship between biological, psychological, social and cultural factors and how they influence a person’s health, wellbeing and development.
Social workers work with individuals, families, groups and communities, across a wide range of settings including child and family services.

Across every field, they maintain a dual focus on improving human wellbeing; and identifying and addressing any external issues (known as systemic or structural issues) that detract from wellbeing, such as inequality, injustice and discrimination.
Our submission The AASW welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the inquiry into the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020.

Social workers practice with a range of people across all life stages and within a range of social and cultural contexts, working with both individuals and communities.
Social workers thus have extensive experience with people whose complex needs are related to key social determinants of 3 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 health, most prominent being poverty and all the implications this brings.

Social work is committed to the human rights of all, improving the wellbeing of all and to achieving an equitable society that means addressing systemic level barriers including access to basic rights and needs.
This underpins the key messages in this submission.

The AASW opposes the expansion of the Cashless Welfare Card as: • it amounts to an unusual penalty on a group of vulnerable people united only by their location, • undermines their autonomy and creates inconvenience and is not necessarily accompanied by any other intervention, • lacks an adequate evidence base in relation to its benefits, • does nothing to achieve long-term structural change nor individual recovery from addiction.
Response The Cashless Welfare Card (CWC) undermines the dignity and autonomy of people who are forced to use it, contravening our commitment to the human rights and dignity for all.

It contravenes a number of articles, not least being: Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 23: (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
As such, we argue that the CWC is ethically unjust as it demonises and places ‘blame’ on the individual for their circumstances, when in fact these may have been the result of structural, systemic and community factors.

It is the position of the AASW, as conveyed in multiple past submissions on the issue, that the scheme is ideologically motivated as opposed to evidence based, and is discriminatory in application.
It is our view, that the recent amendments give unjustifiable ministerial discretion and authority which will further prevent people from exiting the scheme.

The AASW is concerned by the ideological premise of the CWC and the misinformed assumptions the Bill is premised upon.
The defining assumption of the Bill, is that needing to access income support is attributable to individual 4 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 deficiency and a mismanagement of financial affairs.

The scheme punishes people from particular geographical regions for accessing their entitlement to social security.
The Bill fails to acknowledge or proactively address realities like insecure work, caring responsibilities, health barriers to work, geographical isolation and scarcity of educational and employment opportunities, that are significant issues in the regions selected to roll out the scheme.

These factors have been compounded by Covid-19 and the subsequent financial crisis.
We are particularly concerned that the government continues to target Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, by selecting sites to enforce the scheme with a high population of First Peoples.

Of the 22,000 people the transition will impact, 75% will be Indigenous.

1The AASW is opposed to this move which would undermine the self-determination and sovereignty of First Peoples and the prevent the pursual of the Closing the Gap Refresh targets.
We are concerned by the potential adverse impacts the CWC scheme will have on women in family violence situations 2 3 and suggest the risks this scheme could pose to women experiencing family violence be further investigated.
There is evidence that compulsory income-management policies do as much harm as good, according to the first independent study into Compulsory Income Management (CIM) policies in Australia which involved 114 in-depth interviews at four sites: Playford (BasicsCard) and Ceduna (Cashless Debit Card) in South Australia; Shepperton (BasicsCard) in Victoria; and the Bundaberg and Hervey Bay region (Cashless Debit Card) in Queensland.
The University of Queensland’s Professor Greg Marston said4 the majority of participants using the BasicsCard or Cashless Debit Card reported practical difficulties making purchases and paying bills, which introduced new instability into their lives.

The study found some individuals experience these benefits.

But most face extra financial challenges.


These include not having enough cash for essential items, being unable to shop at preferred outlets, buying things at local markets, being unable to buy second-hand goods, and cards being declined even when they are supposed to work.

More than $50 million has been spent on the cashless debit card over the last five years for a trial of 12,150 participants.
Rather than tackling the underlying social issues, the Government is heavy handed imposing controls on what people can spend their entitlements on, by using a state- controlled debit card.
Without appropriate resources to support people with regards to the complex needs that influence their ability to complete education, find work, or maintain work, a CDC is not 1 https://nit.com.au/cashless-debit-card-labelled-the-new-intervention/ 2 Bielefeld, S 2014 ‘Compulsory Income Management and Indigenous Peoples- Exploring Counter Narratives Amidst Colonial Constructions of Vulnerability’ in Sydney Law Review, vol 36, pp.
695-726 3 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-21/queensland-cashless-welfare-card-exit-applications- exit/12579856 4 https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2020/02/compulsory-income-management-disabling-study- shows 5 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 likely to achieve the stated outcomes.

The proposed legislation includes no strategy for how change will occur other than there will be a reduction in purchase of drugs and alcohol, or gambling.
The reason why someone is misusing these substances is not being addressed, rather, to continue to marginalise and stigmatise individuals is likely to result in further deterioration in the psychological and physical well being of the person.

Conclusion The AASW therefore opposes the expansion of the CWC arguing that this is a short term, one dimensional strategy that does not address the key reasons and social and structural factors that result in the social issues experienced by this some people.
Expanding the CWC in the face of the limited existing evidence of success makes this even more difficult to understand.

A commitment to a genuine strategy to address the causes of complex social issues is necessary, which involves an holistic and integrated strategy that has at its core the wellbeing of all citizens and opportunities for all citizens to participate meaningfully and fully in our society.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss any of the points raise in this submission further with the Committee.

6 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 121