Bills Digest No. 125 2002-03
Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment
(Disability Reform) Bill (No. 2) 2002 [No. 2]
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Concluding Comments
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Family and Community Services
Legislation Amendment (Disability Reform) Bill (No. 2) 2002 [No.
2]
Date Introduced:
6 March 2003
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Family and Community
Services
Commencement: There
are three Schedules in the Bill. However, within each Schedule,
different sections and items have various commencement dates. These
commencement dates are set out in detail in the Table in
clause 2 of the Bill.
Purpose
This Bill follows
two previous amending Bills for the Disability Support Pension
(DSP) program. The first Bill was introduced to the House of
Representatives on 16 May 2002 and was called the Family and
Community Services Legislation Amendment (Disability Reform) Bill
2002. Bills Digest No. 157 2001-2002 refers.(1) The
House of Representatives passed the first Bill on 30 May 2002 and
sent a message to the Senate on 20 June 2002, indicating that the
Bill was being forwarded for consideration. This original Bill was
never introduced to the Senate.
The second Bill was introduced to the House of
Representatives on the 27th of June 2002 and was called the
Family and Community Services Legislation Amendment (Disability
Reform) Bill (No. 2) 2002. Bills Digest No. 3 2002-03
refers.(2) This second Bill was passed by the House of
Representatives on 19 September 2002 and after being introduced to
the Senate on 23 September 2002, was rejected on 19 November
2002.(3)
The only difference between the first and second
DSP Bills was that under the second Bill, DSP recipients granted
payments on or before 30 June 2003 would remain under the existing
30 hour a week inability to work test. It would only be those
granted DSP from 1 July 2003 onwards that would be exposed to the
proposed 15 hour a week inability to work test.
The present Bill is identical in content to the
second 2002 Bill and therefore the text of the Bills Digest for
that second Bill, ie. Bills Digest No. 3, 2002 03,(4) is
repeated below.
For a background on the history and evolution of
the DSP program see Bills Digest No. 157, 2001 02.(5)
This Bills Digest also provides comment on the proposed change from
a 30 hour a week inability to work test to a 15 hour a week
inability to work test.
As stated above, this Bill is identical to
proposed legislation introduced into the House of Representatives
on 27 June 2002 and defeated in the Senate on 19 November 2002.
As it is now three months since the Senate
rejected the Bill as initially presented, a second failure or
refusal by the Senate to pass the Bill has the potential to trigger
a simultaneous dissolution of both Houses under section 57 of the
Constitution.
Section 57 relevantly reads:
If the House of Representatives passes any
proposed law, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes
it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not
agree, and if after an interval of three months the House of
Representatives in the same or the next session, again passes the
proposed law with or without any amendments which have been made,
suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or
fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House
of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may
dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives
simultaneously. But such dissolution shall not take place within
six months before the date of the expiry of the House of
Representatives by effluxion of time.
The Government may choose not to advise the
Governor-General to dissolve both Houses or it may delay its
request for a double dissolution. However, the last possible date
for the dissolution of both Houses is 11 August 2004. This date is
calculated by counting back six months from 11 February 2005 which
is the date of expiry of the House of
Representatives.(6)
Original proposal
to modify the DSP 30-hour a week rule to a 15-hour a week
rule
The proposed amendments to the DSP provisions in
the SSA presented in this Bill were originally presented in both
the first and second Bills presented in 2002. The comments and
analysis provided in Bills Digest No. 157, 2001 02(7) in
regards to the proposed changes to the DSP, newstart allowance and
youth allowance programs also refer to the same amendments
presented in the present Bill.
The only differences in the provisions contained
within the first 2002 Bill and the two subsequent Bills are in
Item 15 of Schedule 1, which contains savings
provisions for those claiming DSP prior to 1 July 2003. DSP claims
made up to and including 30 June 2003 are to be subject to the
existing DSP 30-hour a week inability to work test, not the
proposed 15-hour a week inability to work test.
The proposed 15-hour a week inability to work test is to be
applied only to DSP claims made on or after 1 July 2003.
The only new item in this Bill (and in the
second 2002 Bill) compared to the Family and Community Services
Legislation Amendment (Disability Reform) Bill 2002 is
Item 15 of Schedule 1.
Item 15 proposes to insert savings provision for
DSP claims lodged up to and including 30 June 2003. Even where a
claim has been lodged on 30 June 2003, and qualification is
determined after 1 July 2003, the pre-July 2003 30-hour rule
applies.
Under the Item 15 savings
provisions, where there is a break in qualification, and the person
subsequently re-claims DSP, then the post-July 2003 15-hour a week
rule applies. This may act as a significant disincentive for DSP
recipients to give up their DSP for fear of not being able to get
back on the payment under the post-July 2003 conditions (ie. the 15
hour a week test). The main situations in which these concerns
might arise are for those attempting to increase their working
hours beyond 15 hours a week - see below.
Currently, where a DSP recipient commences to
work more than 30 hours a week, there is provision within the
Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (SSAA) to
suspend payments for up to two years. Sections 96 and 97 of the
SSAA refer.(8) The origins of these provisions are to
encourage DSP recipients to make attempts to increase their work
capacity and activity, without undue fear of losing easy re-access
to their DSP, if the increased work activity fails to be sustained.
These same provisions are retained in Item 15 for
the pre-July 2003 DSP recipients in this Bill. This means for those
measured against the 30 hour a week test, they will continue to be
measured against this test, where DSP is suspended for up to two
years as they are attempting to work or undertake work
activities.
This Bill is the same as the second 2002 DSP
modification Bill. Compared to the first DSP reform Bill it simply
proposes to 'save' existing DSP recipients to the 30-hour a week
inability to work test instead of also exposing them to the new
proposed 15 hours a week inability to work test, to be introduced
from 1 July 2003. This means there will be far less 'losers' under
this modified proposal.
It also means the total savings anticipated for
the application of the 15-hour a week rule to the DSP qualification
rules will not be realised and what savings are achieved will be
further into the future.
-
- Bills
Digest No. 157, 2001 02. Family and Community Services Legislation
Amendment (Disability Reform) Bill 2002.
- Bills
Digest No. 3, 2002 03. Family and Community Services Legislation
Amendment (Disability Reform) Bill (No. 2) 2002.
- Senate Hansard, 19 November 2002, pages 6775 6776.
- Bills Digest No. 3, 2002 03, op. cit.
- Bills Digest No. 157, 2001 02, op. cit.
- See: Rob Lundie, Timetable for the Next Commonwealth Election ,
Department of The Parliamentary Library Research
Note, No. 37, 2001-02, May 2002.
- ibid.
- Disability support pension-suspension instead of
cancellation in some cases
-
- a person ceases to be qualified for disability support pension
because the person obtains paid work that is for at least 30 hours
per week; and
-
- )the person has, within the notification period referred to in
section 93, informed the Secretary that
the person has obtained that work;
the Secretary may determine:
- that section 93 does not apply to
the person's disability support pension; and
- that the person's disability support pension is to be
suspended.
Disability support pension-suspension
taken to have been under section 96
97.(1) If:
-
- a person ceases to be qualified for disability support pension
because the person obtains paid work that is for at least 30 hours
per week; and
- disability support pension ceases to be payable to the person
under section 93; and
- within the period of 2 years after the pension ceases to be
payable, the person ceases to do work of the kind referred to in
paragraph (a);
the Secretary may determine that the person is
to be treated as if:
- section 93 had not applied to the
person's disability support pension; and
- the disability support pension had been suspended under
section 96.
Peter Yeend
19 March 2003
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to
Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care
is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the
paper is written using information publicly available at the time
of production. The views expressed are those of the author and
should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services
(IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in
this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for
related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional
legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an
official parliamentary or Australian government document.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2003
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library,
2003.
Back to top