People subject to Income Management as part of the government’s Intervention in the Northern Territory have not been able to properly access rights of review. This is despite laws passed in 2009 which were meant allow them access to review rights via the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) and Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), according to Acting Commonwealth Ombudsman Mr Ron Brent.

The Ombudsman today released an investigation report Review rights for income managed people in the Northern Territory prompted by a Centrelink refusal to grant exemption from IM to a husband and wife (Mr and Mrs A) in a remote NT community.

The Income Management (IM) scheme, introduced in 2007 as part of the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER), allows Centrelink to withhold 50% of a person’s income support and family assistance payments to cover certain expenses such as rent, utilities and food, so it is not spent on prohibited goods.

At the time legislation was amended in 2009 to provide external review rights to the SSAT, about 17,000 people were subject to the scheme.

Mr and Mrs A repeatedly approached Centrelink and FaHCSIA seeking an exemption from IM. In August 2009, a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer notified them that their request for exemption had been refused but, in accordance with the 2009 amendments, they had a right to seek review by the SSAT.

In January 2010, the SSAT decided it did not have jurisdiction to review the case of Mr and Mrs A. This meant that it would also not be able to review the cases of a majority of people then subject to IM. Without a decision from the SSAT, it is not possible to proceed to the AAT. The legislation was amended so that the problem only exists for exemption requests decided before 1 July 2010. The report is critical of both Centrelink and FaHCSIA for not dealing with this issue when it arose. The Ombudsman said, ‘The handling of this issue has been administratively deficient. FaHCSIA and Centrelink should not have left the question of the existence of external rights of review, unanswered since January 2010.

‘Neither Centrelink nor FaHCSIA appropriately addressed the issues created by the SSAT’s decision. The two agencies did not respond by amending legislation or administrative processes to answer the SSAT’s concerns about its jurisdiction,’ Mr Brent said.

The recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report have led FaHCSIA and Centrelink to review their operating procedures and establish new processes.

Download the report: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, and Centrelink: Review Rights for Income Managed People in the Northern Territory, August 2010—10|2010.

Media contact: Media 02 6276 3759

Date of release: 24 August 2010

Skip to main content
    0 results available.
      0 results available.
      language assistant menu topper outer language assistant menu topper inner

      Read documents in your language

      If you need more translations, please contact us via: 1300 362 072 or ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au

      24 Aug 2010: Failure to provide review rights to people under Income Management in the Northern Territory

      People subject to Income Management as part of the government’s Intervention in the Northern Territory have not been able to properly access rights of review. This is despite laws passed in 2009 which were meant allow them access to review rights via the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) and Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), according to Acting Commonwealth Ombudsman Mr Ron Brent.

      The Ombudsman today released an investigation report Review rights for income managed people in the Northern Territory prompted by a Centrelink refusal to grant exemption from IM to a husband and wife (Mr and Mrs A) in a remote NT community.

      The Income Management (IM) scheme, introduced in 2007 as part of the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER), allows Centrelink to withhold 50% of a person’s income support and family assistance payments to cover certain expenses such as rent, utilities and food, so it is not spent on prohibited goods.

      At the time legislation was amended in 2009 to provide external review rights to the SSAT, about 17,000 people were subject to the scheme.

      Mr and Mrs A repeatedly approached Centrelink and FaHCSIA seeking an exemption from IM. In August 2009, a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer notified them that their request for exemption had been refused but, in accordance with the 2009 amendments, they had a right to seek review by the SSAT.

      In January 2010, the SSAT decided it did not have jurisdiction to review the case of Mr and Mrs A. This meant that it would also not be able to review the cases of a majority of people then subject to IM. Without a decision from the SSAT, it is not possible to proceed to the AAT. The legislation was amended so that the problem only exists for exemption requests decided before 1 July 2010. The report is critical of both Centrelink and FaHCSIA for not dealing with this issue when it arose. The Ombudsman said, ‘The handling of this issue has been administratively deficient. FaHCSIA and Centrelink should not have left the question of the existence of external rights of review, unanswered since January 2010.

      ‘Neither Centrelink nor FaHCSIA appropriately addressed the issues created by the SSAT’s decision. The two agencies did not respond by amending legislation or administrative processes to answer the SSAT’s concerns about its jurisdiction,’ Mr Brent said.

      The recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report have led FaHCSIA and Centrelink to review their operating procedures and establish new processes.

      Download the report: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, and Centrelink: Review Rights for Income Managed People in the Northern Territory, August 2010—10|2010.

      Media contact: Media 02 6276 3759

      Date of release: 24 August 2010