(23k)Transcript
23 July 2009
Interview with Tim Cox, 936 ABC Hobart
E&OE PROOF ONLY
SUBJECTS: Child Support Agency, optical surveillance.
TIM COX: Now its easy to conjure a mental picture of James Bond or Inspector Gadget, or what have you, as the Child Support Agency starts to spy on deadbeat parents – parents who don’t pay child support – and it is one of the moves that the Federal Government is considering, but you would sort of lose that mental picture when you find out how many millions of dollars are in play in relation to this.
The Federal Human Services Minister, Chris Bowen, is on the phone, good morning to you.
CHRIS BOWEN: Good morning Tim, good to talk to you.
COX: How many millions are we talking about?
BOWEN: Well look, we transfer lots of payments on behalf of parents, every year. We have an outstanding debt, over the last 20 years of the operation of the Child Support Program, of $700 million. That’s from parents who refuse to meet their obligations; in context, that’s a very small proportion of the total amount that we have paid, but nonetheless that’s a very substantial amount for those families who are missing out…
COX: This is not $700 million that would be going to federal coffers?
BOWEN: No, no, not at all. This is money from non-custodial parents to custodial parents, paying for the upkeep of the children. Look the important point to make is that the vast majority of separated families do the right thing of course and pay their obligations, to make a contribution to the upkeep of their children. But there are some – a very small minority – who go to great lengths to avoid their responsibilities and it is our job – the Child Support Agency’s job – to track them down. So we have been trialing, as you mentioned, this covert surveillance operation, on a very small scale, to track down some of the very worst cases, people who go to great lengths to avoid their obligations to their children.
COX: Alright, there is a moral thing I’m sure for those parents who don’t want to give their money to their former partner – their ex-husband or ex-wife or whatever it may be. But it’s the children who miss out isn’t it?
BOWEN: Well it is, these cases are often very emotional, as you so, often the breakdown has been acrimonious and there are a lot of emotional issues, which are not mine or the Child Support Agency’s job to judge. The bottom line is, that the children are the ultimate beneficiary of the money. In some cases, the non-custodial parents might think that the money is going to the parent not the child, but at the end of the day, there is an obligation there to make a contribution to the parent who has the upkeep of the children. And for that small minority who do the wrong this, we need to take very opportunity to track them down and make them pay their way.
COX: So what measures have worked best in the past? And why can’t those measures be re-instigated?
BOWEN: We do have a range of measures Tim, from the moderate to the extreme, in extreme circumstances. We can put stops on people leaving the country, which has been effective in some cases, until they pay. We can garnish wages so we enter into agreements with employers where we say ‘we will take a proportion of that employee’s pay before it gets to them and pay it to the family’, which we do in serious cases. But there are some people that disappear from the system; refuse to lodge tax returns, move around, and are difficult to find. Therefore, covert surveillance is appropriate in those circumstances.
I’ll give you one example, of a case study, obviously without mentioning any names or private details, an individual who owed $95,000 and claimed not to be working; claimed not to be working, claimed not to have any income – didn’t lodge any tax returns – and we instigated optical surveillance. We found that they turned up at a place of work, which happened to be owned by a relative of theirs. On a daily basis, they appeared to be working. We confronted them with that evidence and they have agreed to pay, by September, that very substantial amount of money to their former family. So, as I say, this is something we only use in extreme circumstances, but it is there for us to use in those circumstances where we feel it might be useful.
COX: How do you choose which cases are warranted?
BOWEN: Well look it has been a trial to see how effective it is. It is an expensive way of doing things, as you can imagine Tim, to have constant surveillance on a person. It is not something the CSA would do lightly. But those cases where people are simply trying to disappear, where perhaps the other parents has some evidence, but not proven evidence, where they are actually working an earning an income, but they are not declaring. Where the Child Support Agency thinks there is a good prospect of a return, where the investment has a good prospect of being returned. We’ve had a very small trial where we’ve placed surveillance in 13 cases; of this 13, 6 have been referred to the Department of Public Prosecutions for evading their obligations, so that’s not a bad strike rate. But as I say, it is an expensive operation, so it is not something that we would put into place for hundreds of thousands of people, but more as a last resort for those who are really avoiding their obligations.
COX: So Minister is it the Child Support Agency, ie. the taxpayer, who is bearing the cost for those ‘deadbeat parents’ as they are generally known?
BOWEN: Well it is to some degree and that’s the way the system works. Where you have a parent who is absolutely refusing to pay their way, I think the average taxpayer would accept that there is a role for government in stepping in and forcing that person to pay and that comes at a cost. That’s a legitimate role for government to play a role in. You’ve got to pay your way and we will track you down and make you pay your way. It will and does come at a cost to the taxpayer but I think most reasonable people would agree that’s appropriate.
COX: Alright, I’ll see what the listeners have to say about this morning, Chris Bowen, good to talk to you.
BOWEN: Thanks.
COX: Chris Bowen, the Federal Human Services Minister.
Ends
Note
- To view PDF documents you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader.