Centrelink’s information collection powers are virtually unrestricted. By way of example, Centrelink routinely launches investigations into a person's relationship status in an attempt to prove that they are partnered. Such practices are in fact encouraged by the design of social security legislation which gives no weight or balance to considerations of privacy.
The severe impact of conditional and punitive welfare on personal autonomy was recently reported upon by Magdalena Sepúlveda Carmona, Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights (4 August 2011, UN Doc A/66/265):
49. By imposing excessive requirements and conditions on access to services and benefits, and severe sanctions for non-compliance, States punish, humiliate and undermine the autonomy of persons living in poverty, exacerbating the challenges they face in overcoming their situation. Moreover, beneficiaries are kept in a state of uncertainty about their future and are unable to plan for the long term.
51. These measures not only undermine beneficiaries’ autonomy and prevent them from making their own choices, they also threaten their enjoyment of a number of human rights, including the right to participate in the decisions that directly affect them and to be free from arbitrary or unlawful State interference in their privacy, family, home or correspondence. Considering that non-compliance with excessive conditions and requirements results in exclusion from social benefits, those entitled to benefits live in constant anxiety and fear that their benefits will be withdrawn and, with them, their primary means of survival. The cumulative impact of living in such circumstances threatens the beneficiaries’ right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
We recommend that the government undertake a thorough review of social security law and policy to see how it can better protect and enhance the privacy of persons receiving social security payments.
The issues paper at question 11 asks whether organisations or classes of people should be exempted from the proposed cause of action and the paper contains the further suggestion that law enforcement agencies might be exempted. It is of fundamental importance that law enforcement officials and other agencies with investigative functions respect the rights of the person they are investigating. To give them carte blanche to override all considerations of privacy during the course of an investigation would set a troubling precedent.
Should you wish to obtain additional information on any of the matters raised in this submission please do not hesitate to contact Mr Lee Hansen, Principal Solicitor, on 02 9211 5389.
Yours sincerely,
Maree O’Halloran, AM
President
National Welfare Rights Network