Centrelink plays a central role in supporting women and children to leave family violence. But how effective is this safety net? Previous research by Economic Justice Australia (formerly the National Social Security Rights Network) found that Centrelink policies and processes often increased women’s risk. Today’s analysis provides an overview Economic Justice Australia’s latest report, authored by Sally Cameron of Welfare Rights Centre (@welfare rights) and Linda Forbes of Economic Justice Australia (@ej_australia), which examines how Centrelink debts intersect with family violence. You can access the full report here: Debt, duress and dob-ins: Centrelink compliance processes and domestic violence

Our new report demonstrates that survivors of domestic violence, usually women, are unfairly held solely responsible for social security debts in situations where the debt was the direct result of their partner’s or ex-partner’s threats, physical violence or coercion. As a result, victim/survivors are being pursued for debt, their financial security is compromised, and they are placed at risk for further abuse.

Centrelink’s policies keep women tethered to their abusers, creating a channel for economic abuse to occur. Image credit: Pixabay.

Responsible for debts not their own

Our research reveals instances where domestic violence victims/survivors’ debts are clearly the direct result of the actions of perpetrators. For example, an abusive partner provides inaccurate information about their income, leading to inaccurate assessment of eligibility and payment rates – often over a protracted period. Women are also forced to provide false information to Centrelink by violent and controlling partners, with threats of violence in retaliation if they contact Centrelink to rectify assessments or leave the relationship.

The ongoing duress experienced by women trapped in these situations can result in massive debts. Victims/survivors are often held solely responsible for these debts, effectively punished by the state as a consequence of violence perpetrated by their abuser.

Payments assessed on relationship status hurts women

Many of the Centrelink debts examined in the report are the result of Centrelink assessing a victim of domestic violence to be a ‘member of a couple’. Payment amounts are determined based on couple status. The single rate of payment is paid at a higher rate than half the couple rate. This policy is based on the idea that the cost of living is lower for two people living as a couple than it is for two single people, and that the income and assets of both members of a couple should therefore be taken into account when working out how much they are entitled to receive.

Where a person is assessed to be a member of a couple and Centrelink considers that they failed to advise Centrelink of commencing the relationship within 14 days, as required, a debt will be raised. The debt could be the difference between the single and couple rate, or if their alleged partner has significant income and assets, the debt could be for the full amount the person received, which can amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Our report shows that women experiencing domestic violence continue to be assessed as being a member of couple for the purposes of social security law. This effectively tethers women and their children to their abuser, even in circumstances where income is not shared between the couple. This means women end up owing a debt to Centrelink when they did not receive any benefit from the Centrelink benefits which were allegedly overpaid. It also enables Centrelink compliance rules and mechanisms, including the anonymous ‘Fraud Tip-off Line’ to be used by abusers as a tool of harassment, abuse, control and revenge.

It can be fixed – if there’s a will

The report makes 27 recommendations to reduce the risk of victims/survivors of domestic violence being pursued to repay unfair Centrelink debts, and ensure that the social security system can play its vital role as a safety net for women to escape domestic violence, and find safety and economic security - without carrying the burden of debts incurred under duress. Some of our key recommendations include:

amend decision-making guidelines used by Services Australia and the AAT to determine relationship status, to make it clear that the presence of domestic violence may indicate an absence of commitment, and that the person is therefore not a member of a couple
ensure that Centrelink decision-makers are trained to take the full range of abusive tactics of family and domestic violence into account in discretionary decision-making – including in assessment of relationship status, and as a means of remedying unfair debts
amend social security legislation to ensure that liability for repayment of a debt rests with the person who benefited from the overpayment – for example, where a woman is coerced by a violent partner into not declaring his income
waiving recovery of debts resulting from domestic and family violence
review Services Australia prosecution guidelines to ensure that where a person has disclosed domestic or family violence, proper consideration is given to whether referral of the case to the CDPP is in the public interest
ensure that information received by Services Australia through its Fraud Tip-off Line is properly triaged, to prevent perpetrators of domestic violence from using spurious anonymous tip-offs as a tool of violence against a current or former partner
enhance access to Centrelink social workers
increase funding for community legal centres providing advice and representation on social security issues
ensure that actions to enhance access to social security rights and entitlements are embedded in women’s safety policy, and included in the next National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children (and associated action plans), with the 2010-2022 plan drawing to a close.

We currently have these absurd rules around debt waiver which mean that a woman’s violent and controlling partner can make the offending statement or omission to Centrelink, and she will be the one who is stuck with the debt. Our report recommends changing the law to ensure that liability for repayment of a debt rests with the person who benefited from the overpayment – for example, where a woman is coerced by a violent partner into not declaring his income. Decision-making guidelines used to determine relationship status should also make it clear that the presence of domestic violence may indicate an absence of commitment, and that the person is therefore not a member of a couple.

Australia’s primary instrument to address family and domestic violence is the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children: 2010–2022, with a new National Plan in the final stages of development. Surprisingly, actions to enhance access to income support have been largely missing from the National Plan and its associated action plans.

We are concerned that the Government’s recent Women’s Safety Summit, which was intended to inform the new National Plan, did not include a session on social security in its agenda. While the $5000 escaping violence packages are a welcome source of crisis support, ongoing social security support must be central to any discussion of women’s safety, as this is the only place where many women will find economic security through an independent source of income - not only to escape, but to remain safe and rebuild their lives.

Read the full report here: Debt, duress and dob-ins: Centrelink compliance processes and domestic violence

This post is part of the Women's Policy Action Tank initiative to analyse government policy using a gendered lens. View our other policy analysis pieces here.

Posted by @SusanMaury

Tethered through Centrelink: Couple payment policies work against women’s safety