Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1694232624549.pdf (Australia)
Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 Senate Enquiry submission Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 111 Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 I write to ask that you oppose the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020.

I am a community member in the Cashless Debit Card (CDC) trial site of Hinkler.
Currently I am not on the CDC as I do not fall into the target groups.

If the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 passes that would all change, especially if the aged pension is added to trigger payments.

Since I am neither an addict nor do I require financial management, I am strongly against these amendments.
My objection is based on the evidence I have found, both written and verbal, which shows that the CDC has failed to achieve the outcomes for which it was created.

I believe that the CDC needs to be scrapped.

The proposed amendments will cause wider damage as it will enable the Minister to expand the use of the CDC, not only geographically but also by increasing the scope of social security recipients who would be force to use the CDC.
This broadening would include (but be not limited to) communities in the Northern Territories, currently on the Basics Card, Veterans, and Aged Pensioners.

The Basics Card is another failed attempt to control an individual’s social security payment.

I have researched and read extensively in relation to these trials, both academic and general media, and cannot find any reports demonstrating it is a success.
I have also followed social media to assess the outcomes reported by those who are participants in this trial.

As a result of this I believe that I am in a very strong position to state that this card has failed in its objectives and that those who have been forced to use it have found themselves socially disadvantages and stigmatised.

If there is a report that demonstrates the opposite to my conclusion I am interested in seeing it.
I have read the Orima Reports, commissioned by the Government, to assess the outcome of the use of the CDC in the Kununurra and Ceduna Trial sites, and the outcomes provide evidence that these trials failed, with the report stating that the outcome KPI’s had not been met.

The conclusion of the report clearly states that those using the CDC experienced low or no benefits, and in some instances it had negative impacts.
Yet these trials were expanded and pushed into the Kalgoorlie Gold Fields (WA) and the Hinkler electorates.

The trials failed in Kununurra and Ceduna and the CDC should have been abolished at this point, however this did not happen.

One can only wonder why, especially as it was established, by a senate enquiry, that it is costing the government $11,000 per card, for each social security recipient regardless of whether they receive $7, $70, or $700.
As of February 2019 more than $9.8 million of funding was paid to Indue, the private company contracted to control all operational aspects of the card.

Expanding the card to more communities will only increase the cost of social security provision without any benefit to the people or the communities affected.
All the reports, including academic and on the ground service providers (an example of which is St. Vincent de Paul), have not supported the blanket use of the CDC as a measure to control the money of those on social security payments to stop addictions, such as gambling or alcohol and illicit drug use.

The ANAO evaluation of the cashless debit card and the wider evidence base does not show that there was a reduction in drug and alcohol related harm.
The evaluation actually confirmed that most participants in the trial sites did not have underlying drug or alcohol dependency or experienced harmful gambling behaviour.
For people experiencing addiction, cutting off access to Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 111 cash may result in ‘circumvention’ behaviours, where people seek out other means to access alcohol and drugs, often with detrimental consequences for themselves and those around them.

I have yet to find any report which supports the Indue Cashless Debit Card as a successful measure to help addicts or to move the unemployed into paid work.
The primary reasons for this is that addiction is a health issue and should be treated as such, and there are not enough jobs available for those who are looking for work.

The suggestion that the Indue CDC is a ‘financial tool’ cannot be supported.

The final evaluation of the NT Intervention found that income management is likely to decrease the financial literacy of participants.

It also showed that income management can actually increase a person’s chances of remaining on income support.
The review found that “rather than building capacity and independence, for many the program has acted to make people more dependent on welfare.” The type of financial management the CDC provides would, in a domestic situation, be classed as abuse, which is illegal.
Considering the payments received by people on social security payment, in many cases, is below the poverty line the majority of those who are on payments have proven themselves, out of necessity, to be exceptional in the area of financial management.

The CDC removes a person’s right to control their finances and allows a third party to take over.
However, if there are errors which might include late payments of rent and bills, declined actions when shopping, and the unauthorised transfer of money out of their account, the cost of these errors has to be borne by the card holder, as Indue are not held accountable.

The Indue Cashless Debit Card removes consumer rights and protection under Australian Law.
Those who are on social security payments often cannot afford to buy new and elect to buy second hand, especially big ticket items, in an attempt to reduce costs and save money.

Because they are being financially managed by a third party accessing the second hand market economy is impossible.

Those who are on the CDC have to call Indue to ask permission to purchase items.
It has yet to be established if the people answering the calls have any financial training or qualification to justify them making these decisions on behalf of others.

Vendors of second-hand goods are not willing to wait days for a sale, and it takes time for permission to be sought, granted (or declined) and money to be made available for the purchase.

On social media, participants are reporting problems they have experienced with using the Indue Card.
There are many instances of being declined at grocery stores, or their rent has not been paid, despite there being adequate funds in their account.

There are also some businesses displaying notices on their shop door stating that they do not accept the Indue card.

All of this has caused stress and they report feeling anxious over using the card, especially in public with the constant threat of a declined transaction, bringing with it feelings of embarrassment, shame, and humiliation.
There are also occasions when children have to miss out on activities because payment is only in cash, for example school activities which are cash only include Mothers Day and Fathers Day stalls.

This type of social exclusion is damaging for children.

I have had face to face conversations with people forced on to the Indue card, none of whom have said anything good about the process.
Many have had money disappear from their Indue account, which has not been authorised by them, and Indue do nothing to investigate or rectify the situation.

There are numerous accounts of non payments by Indue which has caused them to incur late fees and to feel frustrated and powerless.

The Cashless Debit Card does not stop those with addiction from gambling, or accessing alcohol or illicit drugs, and it does not provide work to the unemployed.
The Cashless Debit Card is not a Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 111 successful financial tool, and for those who may need help managing their money there are already viable option available to them, for example Centrepay or nominating a trusted person.
I ask that you vote against the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 because the evidence shows it has failed and has damaged individuals as well as communities.

The Cashless Debit Card Social Experiment needs to be abolished.

Thank you for your time.

Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020Submission 111