Learn from the mistakes of others

Tammy Wolffs, The child support conundrum Tuesday, June 21, 2005
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3578

The Child Support Scheme has been the subject of intense debate since its introduction in 1988. This is entirely understandable, given the emotive nature of family separation and the number of adults and children affected by the scheme. This intensity has been renewed with the recent release of the Report of the Ministerial Taskforce on Child Support.

the report can be found on the facs website, if you dig hard enough. will have to set aside some time to read it, i guess. (shouldn't be too hard. i'll not be getting out to chase women this weekend either.)

In short, external review mechanisms have been set up in every other area of government administration, with very good reason, and this area of decision making has fallen behind. Not only are the principles of external merits review through a tribunal system equally as relevant to CSA decisions as other government decisions, but the informality, speed and nature of investigation and decision making by tribunals seem ideally suited to the CSA environment.

the downside of external review of any agency decision is that one of two repsonses become popular. Either: dig your heels in and make sure your right before you 'make' any decision (decisions delayed as long as possible; or 'what the hell - the tribunal will fix any mistakes'). [the 'csa' is the child support agency: the australian federal government agency responsible for assessing and enforcing the amount of money non-custodial ['non-resident parent' in the relevant jargon] parents are required to pay as child maintenance to the custodial ['resident parent' in the relevant jargon] parent. yeah, our federal government has made family law about as easy to understand and relate to as our 'new' tax laws.]

two things will need to be incorporated if external review will make a real difference.

1. the 'original decisionmaker' should be accountable for their decision; and


2. the criteria for making a decision need to be at least as clear to outsiders as insiders

otherwise lumping more work onto the social security appeals tribunal (which already has a heavy workload) will spread the joy across the already distressed system that is supposed to be helping the most disadvantaged people in our country.