Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026

Anne Ruston

I wish to continue with my remarks on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026. As I was saying, the coalition accepts that there must be a lawful and transparent framework to ensure that payments are being received appropriately, however we have questions on how the removal of an annual cap will operate in practice and what safeguards will exist to prevent people from a cycle of repeated urgent payment requests and ongoing financial hardship.

The coalition welcomes measures such as access to financial counselling, social work services and alternative payment services including Centrepay. We are concerned however that removing the annual cap on urgent payment requests risks encouraging greater reliance on what was previously a limited and tightly controlled program. Without effective safeguards, this change may deepen financial distress rather than relieve it.

We cannot consider these changes to urgent payments in isolation from the broader economic environment in which Australians are currently living. Under this Albanese government, Australians are paying more for everything. Insurance costs have increased by 39 per cent. Energy costs are up by 38 per cent. Rent is up by 22 per cent. Health costs are up by 18 per cent if you can get in. Education costs are up 17 per cent, and food costs are up 16 per cent. These are not discretionary or optional expenses. These are not luxuries. These are fundamental costs of everyday life that all Australians use daily.

Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that many welfare recipients are experiencing persistent financial stress and may be increasingly relying on urgent payments and other emergency measures simply to get by. We know, troublingly, that in 2024-25 alone 440,000 social security payment recipients were granted approximately one million urgent payments. That figure alone should prompt serious reflection by the Albanese government about the impact on Australians from its failed economic policies. Australians are hurting, and Labor has no viable plan to change that. This impact should lead to serious consideration of whether urgent payments are being used to fuel the systemic gaps in financial stability rather than serving their intended purpose as an emergency measure.

As highlighted in the government's own explanatory memorandum for this bill, urgent payments are primarily accessed by vulnerable people. Of all recipients of urgent payments, 45 per cent are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people even though only around six per cent of all income support recipients identify as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. With this evidence of daily struggle, it is clear that closing the gap is also becoming out of reach. This raises serious and legitimate questions about how these changes will operate in practice, particularly in vulnerable and remote communities. The government must explain what concrete measures it has implemented to prevent urgent payments from being exploited or diverted towards harmful activities, including gambling and excessive alcohol consumption, especially in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. It must also explain how it will ensure that the promised support, including financial counselling and access to social work service, will be available to all Australians who need them, regardless of where they live. The coalition calls on the government to guarantee that the changes in this bill will not have a negative impact on our most vulnerable Australians, particularly those living in rural and remote communities.

Schedule 3 of the bill amends the Social Security Act to clarify how employment income is attributed when calculating a person's rate of social security payment. It expressly provides that income attribution rules may apply to the attribute employment income paid to the social security recipient or their partner for the purposes of working out the recipient's rate of pay regardless of whether the relevant payment is a social security payment or a benefit and whether the partner receives a social security payment. It also ensures that the attributed income continues to apply for the full attribution period, including where a payment is cancelled or suspended. The coalition accepts that clarity in income attribution rules is essential for both recipients and the administrators. Clear language and certainty will reduce errors, disputes and administrative complexity and help ensure the payments are calculated consistently and lawfully.

Taken together, these three schedules are designed to provide legal clarity, certainty to practices and policy intentions that have existed for some time. However, notwithstanding our decision to not oppose the bill, we will continue to scrutinise the government's approach, particularly in relation to schedule 2. Urgent payments are being used at scale because people are struggling under the weight of the economy and a government that's failing them. They are being accessed disproportionally by vulnerable Australians and are being relied upon in an economic environment where the cost of living continues to rise. The government must demonstrate that it has put in place robust safeguards to ensure that this change does not unintentionally or inadvertently increase financial stress or hardship for people who are already doing it tough. It must also demonstrate that it has effective systems in place to identify repeat use, emerging risk and patterns of vulnerability and that it is actively intervening with appropriate support, not simply processing a higher volume of advance payments.

The opposition recognises the broader intent of the legislation and the need to clarify technical aspects of the social security and child support frameworks. For that reason the opposition will not be opposing the passage of this bill. We do, however, put the government on notice: the government must follow through on its commitments. It must ensure that robust safeguards are implemented. It must ensure that financial counselling and social support services are accessible, timely and available to individuals and families who rely on them during periods of financial stress. And it must guarantee that the changes to urgent payments do not entrench disadvantage, deepen vulnerability or create new risks for the very Australians our social safety net is meant to protect.

Australian's welfare must strike the right balance between supporting vulnerable Australians and remaining sustainable, responsible and fit for purpose so it can maintain public confidence and long-term viability. That is the expectation of the coalition and that is the benchmark to which the Albanese government must be held.

Dorinda Cox

I rise to provide my support to the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026. Since the Albanese Labor government was first elected, we've been working to restore trust in Australia's social security system, and that trust matters. Without it, the system loses its legitimacy both for taxpayers and for recipients—and also for the broader community.

We all remember what happens when that trust breaks down. The legacy of robodebt showed us what occurs when governments ignore legality, ignore fairness and ignore the human consequences of administrative failure. The Albanese Labor government has chosen to take a very different approach. We've raised working age and student payments and increased the annual single rate of JobSeeker by almost $4,000. We've increased Commonwealth rent assistance by nearly 50 per cent. We've expanded parenting payments single to support around 106,000 additional single parents. We're expanding paid parental leave to 26 weeks, with superannuation now included, and we are increasing the small debt waiver threshold to $250, with around 1.2 million debts expected to be waived or not raised at all. We've also expanded debt waivers for victims-survivors of financial abuse. All of this is about rebuilding a system that is fair, that is lawful and that is humane. This bill is the next step in that work.

This is a technical bill—not just a technical bill but an essential one. The bill makes targeted amendments across three schedules: child support, urgent payments and employment income attribution. Each of these is about aligning legislation with the longstanding policy intent, improving administration and ensuring legal certainty.

First, on child support, this bill improves the administration of child support periods and fixes unintended consequences from earlier legislative changes. It also clarifies when a new child support period begins following a new tax assessment. Where an assessment is made after the 15th of the month, the new period will begin not in the next month but, in fact, in the month after. This is a practical reform. It ensures that parents are not given just days to adjust to changes in their financial obligations, which is the difference between thriving and surviving for families in real time. Instead, they are given sufficient time to plan and manage their finances.

Just as importantly, the bill corrects an anomaly that could allow a parent with less than 35 per cent care of a child to receive child support. This was never the intention of the parliament. The child support system is based on a clear principle: that the financial responsibility reflects the level of care. Where a parent has less than 35 per cent care, they are not bearing the primary costs of raising a child and should not receive child support. This bill restores that principle across all cases and across all formulas. It does so by retrospectively applying the correction to ensure consistency since 2008 whilst preserving the validity of past decisions and maintaining certainty for families. Importantly, as set out in the statement of compatibility with human rights, these changes promote the best interests of the child and support the right of the child to an adequate standard of living by ensuring that child support is distributed fairly and appropriately.

Secondly, on urgent payments, this bill provides a clear legislative framework for urgent payments, a longstanding feature of the social security system that, until now, has not had a sufficiently explicit legal basis. Urgent payments allow people to access part of their accrued entitlement early when they are experiencing exceptional and unforeseen circumstances. This is not an additional payment. Urgent payments allow people to access part of their accrued entitlement early when they are experiencing those exceptional and unforeseen circumstances. This is their lifeline, enabling people to manage sudden costs like medical expenses, housing instability or family emergency. Within this bill, it formalises that system. It establishes clear eligibility criteria, clear limits on payment amounts and safeguards to ensure that people do not overdraw against their entitlement. It also ensures that the system can be delivered efficiently through automated processes while still providing human support where needed, particularly for those who rely on urgent payments frequently. And it sits alongside broader investment, including increased funding for emergency relief services and expansion of the No Interest Loans Scheme to ensure people have access to safe, fair financial support. These reforms promote the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living by ensuring people can access support when they need it the most.

Thirdly, on employment income attribution, this bill clarifies how employment income, including a partner's income, is assessed for the purposes of social security payments. It is about ensuring that the income test operates as intended. It makes clear that employment income attribution applies to both the recipient and their partner and that income continues to be attributed across the relevant periods, even where payments are suspended, cancelled or restarted. Again, this is not a policy shift. It is a clarification. It ensures consistency. It removes ambiguity. It strengthens the integrity of the whole system.

This bill is about responsible government and about identifying where the law does not align with policy intent and fixing it. It is about ensuring that longstanding administrative practices have a clear legal foundation, and it is about continuing the work of rebuilding trust in Australia's social security system after years of neglect and failure. This bill strengthens the fairness, clarity and effectiveness of the system. This bill also supports families. It supports vulnerable Australians, and it supports confidence in the rule of law. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Long debate text truncated.