Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cashless Welfare Transfers for ‘Vulnerable’ Welfare Recipients: Law, Ethics and Vulnerability

  • Published:
Feminist Legal Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article aims to contribute to literature on the conceptualisation of ‘vulnerability’ and its use by neo-liberal welfare regimes to demean, stigmatize and responsibilize welfare recipients. Several conceptions of ‘vulnerability’ will be explored and utilised in the context of welfare reforms that purport to regulate social security recipients as highly risky ‘vulnerable’ subjects. However, as this article will make clear, ‘vulnerability’ is a somewhat slippery concept and one susceptible to abuse by powerful interests intent on increasing coercive surveillance, discipline and disentitlement for those designated as ‘vulnerable’. Legislation enacted ostensibly to address the ‘vulnerability’ of welfare recipients can foster intensive regulation and it must be asked who benefits most from such arrangements and the rhetoric that supports them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Jeremy Bentham proposed that all institutions should be grounded in architecture called the “panopticon”, to foster “A new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind” with continuous surveillance (Bentham 1995, 31, 43–44). Whilst the panopticon proposed by Bentham was a physical structure, new technologies have made possible different types of architecture to enable the sort of constant surveillance he envisioned (Lattas and Morris 2010, 82).

  2. Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Welfare Payment Reform) Act 2007 (Cth).

  3. Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform and Reinstatement of Racial Discrimination Act) Act 2010 (Cth); Social Security Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (Cth); Social Services Legislation Amendment (No 2) Act 2015 (Cth).

  4. Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) ss 123UA-123UGA.

  5. Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 123TI.

  6. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) s 124PM.

  7. Commonwealth of Australia (2007, 4, 6); Commonwealth of Australia (2009, 12786); Commonwealth of Australia (2015, 2); Statement of Compatibility of Human Rights (2015, 3).

  8. Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 123TH.

  9. Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Welfare Payment Reform) Act 2007 (Cth) ss 4(3) and 6(3).

  10. The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform and Reinstatement of Racial Discrimination Act) Act 2010 (Cth) schedule 2 part 2 ss 36 and 37 introduced into the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) ss 123UCA and 123UGA respectively.

  11. Centrelink is the Australian government agency that has long had responsibility for making social security payments.

  12. The Social Security (Administration) (Vulnerable Welfare Payment Recipient) Principles 2013, under principle 8(1), made pursuant to s 123UGA(2) of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth).

  13. Section 123UCB of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) applies income management to those defined as ‘disengaged youth’. Section 123UCC subjects those who are deemed to be ‘long-term welfare recipients’ to income management. People who fall within either of these groups can seek an exemption if they are eligible under ss 123UGC or 123UGD.

  14. Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 123UGD(1)(d).

  15. The Commonwealth Ombudsman has power to investigate the administrative operations of government agencies pursuant to the Ombudsman Act 1976 (Cth).

  16. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) s 124PJ.

  17. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) ss 124 PB, 124PK.

  18. Referring to Forrest 2014.

  19. For instance, in the National Drug Strategy Household Survey 2016 the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report that “recent cocaine use was highest among those who were employed (3.8%) and lived in Major cities (3.2%) or high socioeconomic areas (3.3% and 4.0% in the highest and second highest socioeconomic areas, respectively)” (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2016, 64). For this report “the 20% of areas with the greatest overall level of disadvantage is described as the ‘lowest socioeconomic area’. The 20% of areas with the greatest level of advantage—the top fifth—is described as the ‘highest socioeconomic area’” (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2016, 101).

  20. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) s 124PD.

  21. There were some early reports that examined income management in the context of other Intervention measures noting adverse effects, for example, Australian Indigenous Doctors’ Association and Centre for Health Equity Training, Research and Evaluation, University of New South Wales, Health Impact Assessment of the Northern Territory Emergency Response (2010) 22–23; and suggesting that it should be voluntary rather than universal, for instance, Peter Yu, Marcia Ella Duncan, Bill Gray, Northern Territory Emergency Response: Report of the NTER Review Board (2008) 10.

  22. The reference numbers for these contracts between the Department of Social Services and Indue Ltd are CN3323493-A1 and CN3290604 respectively, published on AusTender www.tenders.gov.au. Accessed 27 November 2017.

  23. Reference number CN3323493-A2, published on AusTender www.tenders.gov.au. Accessed 27 November 2017.

  24. Whether compulsory income management is a type of risk-based regulation is a matter for further study. Fiona Haines (2011, 1) explains that regulation often has “the goal of avoiding, or at least reducing, the risk of future harm.” Political discourse accompanying the cashless welfare legislation represents welfare recipients as highly risky subjects who need intensive regulation, as people especially vulnerable to making bad financial decisions. However, as Kathryn Henne (2015, 9) observes, “a society marked by heightened awareness of risk … can actually yield a perpetual preoccupation that seeks and manufactures more risk in an effort to control it.” This is apparent in the evolution of various compulsory income management programs.

  25. Welfare recipients now subject to various forms of compulsory income management also experience diminished rights vis-à-vis previous generations who could access cash payments. There is an element of intergenerational inequity in this situation—and an ethical approach to poverty governance requires that people “inherit suitable conditions for living decent lives” (Thompson 2014, 170).

  26. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) s 124PK.

  27. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Act 2015 (Cth) s 124PN and s 124PO. The legislation contains no procedures to ensure that affected welfare recipients have access to the information about them that is to be gathered, stored, monitored and shared.

  28. For many, income management is combined with the time and labour discipline of workfare under the Community Development Program: Media Release from the Gurindji 2015, 104–105; Leemans 2015, 160–161.

References

  • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner. 2016. Social Justice and Native Title Report 2016. Sydney: Australian Human Rights Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Joel. 2014. Autonomy and Vulnerability Entwined. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 134–161. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Athanasiou, Athena. 2016. Nonsovereign Agonism (or, Beyond Affirmation versus Vulnerability). In Vulnerability in Resistance, ed. Judith Butler, Zeynep Gambetti, and Leticia Sabsay, 256–277. Durham & London: Duke University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government. 2015. Budget 2015: Welfare Integrity Measures. http://www.budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/glossy/tax/html/tax-12.htm. Accessed 8 Dec 2016.

  • Australian Government. 2017. Budget Overview. http://budget.gov.au/2017-18/content/glossies/overview/html/overview-21.htm. Accessed 12 May 2017.

  • Australian Indigenous Doctors’ Association and Centre for Health Equity Training Research and Evaluation. 2010. Health Impact Assessment of the Northern Territory Emergency Response. Sydney: University of New South Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2017. National Drug Strategy Household Survey 2016: Detailed Findings, Drug Statistics series no. 31. Cat. no. PHE 214. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

  • Australian Law Reform Commission. 2011. Family Violence and Commonwealth Laws—Improving Legal Frameworks: Final Report. Sydney: Australian Law Reform Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, Jeremy. 1995. The Panopticon Writings. London & New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bielefeld, Shelley. 2012. Compulsory Income Management and Indigenous Australians—Delivering Social Justice or Furthering Colonial Domination? University of New South Wales Law Journal 35 (2): 522–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bielefeld, Shelley. 2014a. Compulsory Income Management—Exploring Counter Narratives amidst Colonial Constructions of Vulnerability. Sydney Law Review 36 (4): 695–726.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bielefeld, Shelley. 2014b. Income Management and Indigenous Peoples—Nudged into a Stronger Future? Griffith Law Review 23 (2): 285–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielefeld, Shelley. 2016. Income Management and Indigenous Women—A New Chapter of Patriarchal Colonial Governance? University of New South Wales Law Journal 39 (2): 843–878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, J.Rob, Matthew Gray, Kelly Hand, Bruce Bradbury, Christine Eastman, and Ilan Katz. 2012. Evaluating New Income Management in the Northern Territory: First Evaluation Report. Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, J.Rob, Matthew Gray, Kelly Hand, and Ilan Katz. 2014. Evaluating New Income Management in the Northern Territory: Final Evaluation Report. Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, J Rob. 2016. Income Management Evaluations: What Do We Now Know? Placing the Findings of the Evaluation of New Income Management in the Northern Territory in Context. Working Paper No. 111. Canberra: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Development, The Australian National University.

  • Brown, Wendy. 2015. Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Judith. 2016. Rethinking Vulnerability and Resistance. In Vulnerability in Resistance, ed. Judith Butler, Zeynep Gambetti, and Leticia Sabsay, 12–27. Durham & London: Duke University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Judith, Zeynep Gambetti, and Leticia Sabsay. 2016. Introduction. In Vulnerability in Resistance, ed. Judith Butler, Zeynep Gambetti, and Leticia Sabsay, 1–11. Durham & London: Duke University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. 2010. Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 9 of the convention: Concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Seventy-seventh session.

  • Commonwealth of Australia. 2007. Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 7 August (Malcolm Brough).

  • Commonwealth of Australia. 2009. Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 25 November (Jennifer Macklin).

  • Commonwealth of Australia. 2015. Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 19 August (Alan Tudge).

  • Commonwealth Ombudsman. 2013. Ombudsman 2012–2013 Annual Report. Sydney: Commonwealth Ombudsman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conifer, Dan. 2017. Centrelink cashless welfare card trial costing taxpayers $10,000 per participant. Australian Broadcasting Corporation Radio, 2 May. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-02/cashless-welfare-trial-costing-taxpayers-$10k-per-participant/8488268. Accessed 10 May 2017.

  • Davey, Melissa. 2017. ‘Ration days again’: cashless welfare card ignites shame, The Guardian, 9 January. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jan/09/ration-days-again-cashless-welfare-card-ignites-shame. Accessed 14 May 2017.

  • Department of Social Services. 2016a. Cashless Debit Card Trial—Overview. https://www.dss.gov.au/families-and-children/programmes-services/welfare-conditionality/cashless-debit-card-trial-overview. Accessed 27 Nov 2017.

  • Department of Social Services. 2017. Cashless Debit Card Trial Evaluation: Wave 1 Interim Evaluation Report. Canberra: Orima Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Social Services. 2016b. Income Management Summary Data (25 March 2016). https://www.data.gov.au/dataset/income-management-summary-data/resource/d8057299-a231-47b0-ac37-0cb92b572227. Accessed 8 Dec 2016.

  • Department of Social Services. 2016c. Cashless Debit Card and Income Management Summary. 31 August. https://www.data.gov.au/dataset/income-management-summary-data/resource/7cc01938-81b4-43bc-b96a-bf697cda190f. Accessed 8 Dec 2016.

  • Department of Social Services. 2015. Place-Based Income Management. 28 October. https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/families-and-children/programs-services/place-based-income-management. Accessed 10 May 2017.

  • Department of Work & Pensions. 2016. Evaluation of the prepaid card live test. Research Report No 926. The Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research at Sheffield Hallam University and the Department for Work and Pensions.

  • Equality Rights Alliance. 2011. Women’s Experience of Income Management in the Northern Territory. http://www.equalityrightsalliance.org.au/projects/womens-experience-income-management-northern-territory. Accessed 12 Dec 2016.

  • Explanatory Memorandum, Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 (Cth).

  • Fineman, Martha. 2008. The Vulnerable Subject: Anchoring Equality in the Human Condition. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 20 (1): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fineman, Martha. 2010–2011. The Vulnerable Subject and the Responsive State. Emory Law Journal 60: 251–275.

  • Fraser, Nancy. 2013. Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis. London & New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrest, Andrew. 2014. The Forrest Review. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the College De France 1978–1979. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, Fiona. 2011. The Paradox of Regulation: What Regulation Can Achieve and What it Cannot. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, David. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henne, Kathryn. 2015. Testing for Athlete Citizenship: Regulating Doping and Sex in Sport. New Brunswick, New Jersey & London: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humpage, Louise. 2016. Income Management in New Zealand and Australia: Differently Framed but Similarly Problematic for Indigenous Peoples. Critical Social Policy 36 (4): 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Opened for signature 21 December 1965, 660 United Nations Treaty Series 195 (entered into force 4 January 1969).

  • Lattas, Andrew, and Barry Morris. 2010. The Politics of Suffering and the Politics of Anthropology. In Culture Crisis: Anthropology and Politics in Aboriginal Australia, ed. Jon Altman, and Melinda Hinkson, 61–87. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leemans, John. 2015. Stronger Futures. In The Intervention: An Anthology, ed. Rosie Scott, and Anita Heiss, 160–161. Melbourne: Concerned Australians.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey, Jaime. 2016. Developing Vulnerability: A Situational Response to the Abuse of Women with Mental Disabilities. Feminist Legal Studies 24: 295–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Catriona. 2014. The Importance of Relational Autonomy and Capabilities for an Ethics of Vulnerability. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 33–59. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Catriona, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds. 2014. Introduction: What Is Vulnerability, and Why Does It Matter for Moral Theory? In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 1–29. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, Daniel. 2017. Cashless welfare cards practical love: PM. The West Australian, 1 September 2017. https://thewest.com.au/politics/cashless-welfare-cards-practical-love-pm-ng-s-1767548. Accessed 17 Oct 2017.

  • Media Release from the Gurindji. 2015. In The Intervention: An Anthology, ed. Rosie Scott and Anita Heiss, 103–105. Melbourne: Concerned Australians.

  • Munro, Vanessa E., and Jane Scoular. 2012. Abusing Vulnerability? Contemporary Law and Policy Responses to Sex Work in the UK. Feminist Legal Studies 20: 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Welfare Rights Network. 2015. Submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs on the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Bill 2015.

  • Nedelsky, Jennifer. 1989. Reconceiving Autonomy: Sources, Thoughts and Possibilities. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 1: 7–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plimmer, Gill. 2016. Use of bitcoin tech to pay UK benefits sparks privacy concerns. Financial Times, 12 July. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/33d5b3fc-4767-11e6-b387-64ab0a67014c.html#axzz4F0wuHa2m. Accessed 15 July 2016.

  • Redman, Jamie. 2016. UK Gov’t is Trialling the Blockchain for Welfare & Pensions. Bitcoin.com, 10 July. https://news.bitcoin.com/uk-govt-trialling-blockchain-welfare/. Accessed 12 Dec 2016.

  • Rogers, Wendy. 2014. Vulnerability and Bioethics. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers and Susan Dodds, 60–87. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Scully, Jackie L. 2014. Disability and Vulnerability: On Bodies, Dependence and Power. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 204–221. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statement of Compatibility of Human Rights for the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Debit Card Trial) Bill 2015 (Cth).

  • Thompson, Janna. 2014. Being in Time: Ethics and Temporal Vulnerability. In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, ed. Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers, and Susan Dodds, 162–178. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger, Roberto. 2004. False Necessity: Anti-Necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy. London & New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vivian, Alison. 2010. The NTER Redesign Consultation Process: Not Very Special. Australian Indigenous Law Review 14 (1): 46–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, Nicole. 2011. The Northern Territory Emergency Response—Has It Really Improved the Lives of Aboriginal Women and Children? Australian Feminist Law Journal 35: 147–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West-Pavlov, Russell. 2013. Temporalities. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, Peter, Marcia E. Duncan, and Bill Gray. 2008. Northern Territory Emergency Response: Report of the NTER Review Board. Canberra: Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wild, Rex, and Pat Anderson. 2007. Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle: Little children are sacred. Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse. Darwin: Northern Territory Government. http://www.inquirysaac.nt.gov.au/pdf/bipacsa_final_report.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 2017.

Download references

Acknowledgements

My sincere thanks to Dr Kate Henne, Dr Marina Nehme, the editors, and the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback on an earlier draft; and to the School of Regulation and Global Governance (RegNet) at the Australian National University (ANU) who supported this research as part of a body of work on regulation, welfare conditionality, and Indigenous peoples undertaken as the Braithwaite Research Fellow. Thanks are also expressed for support via an ANU Early Career Researcher (ECR) Travel Grant and an ANU College of Asia and the Pacific ECR Research Development Award.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia

    Shelley Bielefeld

Authors
  1. Shelley Bielefeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shelley Bielefeld.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bielefeld, S. Cashless Welfare Transfers for ‘Vulnerable’ Welfare Recipients: Law, Ethics and Vulnerability. Fem Leg Stud 26, 1–23 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-018-9363-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-018-9363-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation