Morrison government failed to show cashless debit card scheme works, auditor general says.

Extract from The Guardian

Inequality reporting

Welfare

Scathing report finds Department of Social Services has not demonstrated the program is meeting objectives.

The government has not demonstrated the cashless debit card is working despite operating trials for more than five years, the auditor general says.

Supported by

About this content

Luke Henriques-Gomes Social affairs and inequality editor

@lukehgomes

Thu 2 Jun 2022 18.38 AEST

Last modified on Thu 2 Jun 2022 23.30 AEST

The auditor general has been highly critical of the former government’s handling of the cashless debit card, finding the Morrison government had not demonstrated whether the scheme was working despite operating trials across the country for more than five years.

A scathing Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report, tabled in parliament on Thursday, said the Department of Social Services, which ran the program, had “not demonstrated that the CDC program is meeting its intended objectives”.

The finding follows two independent evaluations of the card and with the former government having spent more than $80m on its operation, expanded the program into new regions and even tried to make it permanent.

The new Labor government has pledged to scrap the cashless debit card and all forms of income management as compulsory schemes, but flagged it would first consult with affected communities.

Cashless welfare: Labor vows to end compulsory use of basics card

Read more

The ANAO’s most recent audit was established after it had been highly critical of the department’s handling of the scheme in a report handed down in 2018.

The card, established in 2016 under the former Coalition government, quarantines 80% of a person’s welfare payments on to a debit card that cannot be used to withdraw cash or buy alcohol or gambling products.

The card was pitched as a solution to social problems in particular communities and supporters claim there is anecdotal evidence it is working.

But the ANAO report finds that, despite two independent evaluations, the government is yet to demonstrate the card is meeting these objectives.

It was particularly critical of a $2m independent evaluation conducted by the University of Adelaide, which was established after the ANAO found the first evaluation’s flaws meant it was “difficult to conclude whether there had been a reduction in social harm”.

In the case of the second evaluation, it had “similar methodological limitations to the first impact evaluation”, the ANAO said, a fact admitted by the government when it was finally released in February 2021. This essentially meant it was still difficult to determine whether any outcomes could be attributed to the card.

However, before then, the government had sought to legislate to make the scheme permanent across sites in Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland, and expand it to the Northern Territory.

It had refused to release the report while parliament considered the bill, though Guardian Australia reported on leaked sections which cast doubt on the card’s effectiveness.

In the end, the government won enough support for the trials to continue, but the Senate opposed making the trials permanent.

• Sign up to receive an email with the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning

“The CDC program extension and expansion was not informed by an effective second impact evaluation, cost-benefit analysis or post-implementation review,” the ANAO report said.

The ANAO also revealed the government had commissioned a cost-benefit analysis, but again found its content was of limited use.

The card began in Ceduna, South Australia and East Kimberley and the Goldfields in Western Australia, but was then expanded to Bundaberg and Hervey Bay in Queensland. It was more recently introduced into the Northern Territory and Cape York, which were already using forms of “income management”.

Critics have long argued the card was ineffective at reducing social harm, stigmatised people on welfare, caused practical difficulties including locking low-income people out of the cash economy, and that the millions spent on the scheme would be better spent on other social programs. Other independent reports have also questioned its effectiveness.

In response to the ANAO, the Department of Social Services noted the audit did find the “department’s administrative oversight of the program is largely effective”.

“We acknowledge the rationale and supporting evidence that the second impact evaluation and the cost-benefit analysis were constrained by limitations to available data,” it said.

It rejected a recommendation for an independent review of the second evaluation, saying it would not be value for money given the department had already accepted its limitations.

It accepted the ANAO’s recommendation that the department develop “internal performance measures and targets to better monitor CDC program implementation and impact”.