Report of the Ministerial Review into the Department of Work and Income
      PREVIOUS | CONTENTS | NEXT  
   


SECTION THREE: SUBMISSIONS AND MEETINGS

  1. Submissions from Government Departments and Crown Entities
  2. Staff Focus Groups
  3. Staff Submissions
  4. Stakeholder Groups
  5. Beneficiary Advocacy Groups
  6. Public Submissions

E. BENEFICIARY ADVOCACY GROUPS

15.1    During March the review team held four meetings with a total of 24 representatives from advocacy groups around the country. Many of the issues raised were not new to DWI, but also existed in the previous organisations. An added complexity with the feedback from advocacy groups is separating what is linked to Government policy or direction, from issues related to DWI itself.

15.2    Advocates were concerned about the concept of benefit dependency and the assumption that benefit dependency is negative. While some advocates acknowledged that this stemmed from previous Government policy they felt it was applied with inappropriate enthusiasm within DWI.

15.3    Restrictive implementation of policy was a particular concern with special benefit and emergency assistance policy and in their view resulted in front-line staff not applying the discretion or flexibility allowed in the legislation. They also raised concern that staff were encouraged to reduce payments through DWI's KPIs.

15.4    While some advocates were positive about individual DWI staff others complained that they had had difficulties with some staff and that Case Managers needed more training and should have lower case loads.

15.5    Advocates held mixed views on Call Centres - some talked about frustrations in access while others said Call Centres had made access to Case Managers easier.

15.6    Of major concern to the advocates was the area of benefit crime. Their view was that much 'crime' is not actually crime - it is either inadvertent or based on flawed legislation. They also claimed that DWI pursues benefit crime too far in investigation and prosecution.

15.7    Advocacy groups all appeared to have regular contact with DWI, both on an individual case basis and in terms of networking. They thought that, if adequately funded, they could play a larger role in providing clients with information and training DWI staff.


 
      PREVIOUS | CONTENTS | NEXT  

 
HOME PAGE | DOCUMENT DOWNLOAD