Majority Labor-Greens committee agrees program causes anxiety to many participants but is divided on course of action

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

A Labor government would retain but overhaul the contentious ParentsNext welfare program, which a Senate inquiry report said on Friday was causing “anxiety, stress and harm” for many of the 70,000 participants.

The pre-employment program is compulsory for people receiving parenting payment with children as young as six months who are classified as “disadvantaged” by Centrelink. It should not “continue in its current form”, the Senate committee report said.

But the Labor-Greens majority committee was split on how it should be altered. Labor committed to a significant overhaul of the program, but stopped short of endorsing one of the main changes requested by welfare groups, community advocates and the Greens: that it be made completely voluntary for all participants, if not scrapped entirely.

Labor’s employment services spokeswoman, Terri Butler, said the evidence presented to the committee showed the program had “caused parents and their children great distress”.

She said Labor would “overhaul the program and put in place a new approach”.

“Story time and swimming lessons are important, but no one should have their income taken away for failing to attend,” she said.

“Parents will still be required to participate in the program when they first become eligible for it.

“Beyond that, we will take an evidence-based case-management approach to making sure the program meets the needs of individual families without being intrusive or punitive.”

The inquiry was set up amid mounting criticism of the program, including claims published by Guardian Australia that participants, the majority of whom are single women, were being forced to attend activities such as story time and playgroup in order to keep their payments.

The government has defended the program, although the jobs minister, Kelly O’Dwyer, has flagged a crackdown on providers who flout the rules.

Teenagers in jobless homes twice as likely to feel 'sad or very sad' about their lives Read more

Coalition senators recommended no significant changes to the program. “The committee has noted in its report that there are benefits to participants from the program,” they said. “It is the view of Coalition senators that the program should continue and for that to successfully occur, a compliance framework must apply to the program.”

The Greens senator and committee chair, Rachel Siewert, said Labor’s policy would continue the “initial command and control approach”.

“You are likely to put people off that way,” she said.

She said it should be made voluntary for all current and future participants and that the “targeted compliance framework” regime should be removed from the program.

Labor said in the report an initial appointment would be mandatory for participants, who could fail to attend once before facing a possible payment suspension.

Their continued participation would be by agreement with their provider, and compliance measures would not apply to any activities.

Guardian Australia revealed this year that one in five participants had received a payment suspension as a result of the program, which was rolled out nationally in July. The government says most suspensions were resolved before a person missed a payment.

In response to the report, a coalition of 17 welfare groups, legal groups and the peak welfare body, Acoss, called for an end to the program.

“The harsh reality of this program is completely out of step with the needs of struggling families and community expectations,” they said on Friday.

Ella Buckland, who led a campaign that was instrumental in bringing about the Senate inquiry, said the report was “disappointing”.

“The only mutual obligation a single or sole parent should have is raising their child while in return receiving a nominal amount of money from the government for their full-time parenting role.”

The report also outlined a range of perverse situations that had resulted from the compliance aspect of the program, included participants being forced to “send text messages, and in some instances photographic evidence, that they had attended each activity”.

Librarians had also complained about being asked to confirm the attendance of participants at story time sessions.

Despite a directive from the department that providers contact libraries before making participants attend as a compulsory activity, Guardian Australia has confirmed that ParentsNext case managers have continued with the practice.

The chief executive of the Australian Library and Information Association, Sue McKerracher, told Guardian Australia libraries were being “hijacked” by the program. She said her members did not support story time being used as a ParentsNext activity.

The report also called on the Department of Jobs and Small Business to consider sanctions against ParentsNext providers “who are found to have pressured or coerced participants into signing the Privacy Notification and Consent form”.

Guardian Australia revealed in January that multiple women had complained that they were forced to sign the forms.