Child Support and Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Ending Financial Abuse in the Child Support Scheme No. 1) Bill 2026; Second Reading

Steggall welcomed the bill but moved a second reading amendment to address gaps, including stronger ATO enforcement for non-lodgement of tax returns and automatic wage withholding. Steggall argued that the three-month pause on family tax benefit debts was insufficient and that liability should be pursued directly against paying parents. Steggall called for extending child support assessments for students turning 18 during the school year and urged public reporting on reform outcomes.

Byrnes supported the bill, citing local cases where the system failed victims of domestic violence due to mandatory document exchange and poor debt recovery. Byrnes explained that the new discretionary powers allow Services Australia to refuse harmful applications and dismiss vexatious objections. Byrnes detailed how the bill protects parents from family tax benefit debts arising from retrospective reassessments and noted upcoming reforms including employer withholding and travel bans.

Chaney supported the bill and seconded Steggall's amendment, highlighting the prevalence of unpaid child support and its use as a tool for coercive control. Chaney criticised the administrative burden on parents, citing excessive correspondence and long wait times for agency support. Chaney urged the government to measure system load and improve communication, while supporting the amendment's focus on tax return enforcement and wage garnishment.

Doyle supported the bill, sharing a constituent's experience of unrecoverable child support debt to illustrate the human impact of system failures. Doyle explained how the bill's three schedules address harassment, family tax benefit debt risks, and overseas access. Doyle emphasised that the reforms are part of a broader investment in family safety and economic security, ensuring children receive necessary support regardless of parental separation.

Spender supported the bill, noting it addresses systemic abuse identified by the Commonwealth Ombudsman and other inquiries. Spender urged the inclusion of a specific definition of 'harm' to ensure consistent application of discretionary powers. Spender highlighted the importance of removing mandatory document exchange to protect victim-survivors and commended the measures to improve debt recovery and overseas access.

Lim supported the bill, citing constituent experiences of significant unpaid child support debts and the stress caused by system inefficiencies. Lim outlined how the reforms provide discretion to refuse harmful applications and improve information exchange safety. Lim noted the bill's provisions for pausing family tax benefit debt collection and allowing direct overseas applications, framing these as steps toward a safer and more effective system.

Farley opposed the bill, arguing that broad discretionary powers to refuse applications lacked sufficient safeguards and clear definitions of harm. Farley raised concerns that removing mandatory document exchange could prevent parents from challenging misleading evidence or omissions. Farley also objected to the dismissal of objections without detailed reasons and the reliance on regulations for key details, urging greater transparency and accountability.

lead

Coffey argued that the child support system is often weaponised by former partners to harass and control ex-partners, causing significant financial and emotional distress. Coffey highlighted that over $2 billion in child support remains unpaid and more than 100,000 parents are at risk of family violence within the scheme. The bill provides Services Australia with powers to refuse applications that cause harm and to redact sensitive personal information to protect safety. It also addresses unfair family tax benefit debts by introducing a pause on recovery and allows direct applications from parents in certain overseas jurisdictions. Coffey described the legislation as the first stage of a broader reform program informed by ombudsman reports and community advocacy.

Clutterham supported the bill, noting that loopholes allow some parents to avoid paying child support or to harass former partners through the system. Clutterham explained that the legislation closes these loopholes by giving the registrar discretion to refuse applications and dismiss frivolous objections. The bill also suspends recovery of family tax benefit debts for a three-month period, allowing parents to seek waivers or move to agency collection. Clutterham emphasised that the reforms respond to findings from the Commonwealth Ombudsman and aim to protect families from financial abuse.

Ng argued that the bill addresses systems abuse and financial abuse, which are forms of family violence that can continue after separation. Ng stated that the legislation empowers Services Australia to refuse harmful applications and redact sensitive documents to protect victim-survivors. Ng highlighted the government's broader investment in family violence prevention, including paid leave and crisis accommodation. Ng noted that the bill improves access for children overseas and strengthens collection arrangements to ensure parents meet their financial responsibilities.

Jarrett argued that the bill prevents the child support system from being used as a tool for coercive control and financial insecurity. Jarrett supported measures allowing Services Australia to dismiss objections with little prospect of success and to share information via summaries rather than full document exchanges. Jarrett highlighted the unfairness of family tax benefit debts arising from late tax lodgments and welcomed the pause on debt recovery. Jarrett emphasised that the reforms protect privacy and safety while maintaining procedural fairness for all parents.

Repacholi supported the bill, noting that it addresses concerns raised by both men and women about the misuse of the child support system. Repacholi explained that the legislation allows Services Australia to refuse harmful applications and redact sensitive information to protect safety. Repacholi highlighted the pause on family tax benefit debt recovery and the option for paying parents to choose agency collection. Repacholi stressed that the reforms aim to reduce conflict and ensure that children's needs are met without exposing parents to unnecessary harm.

Belyea supported the bill, citing the significant amount of unpaid child support and the number of parents experiencing family violence within the scheme. Belyea argued that the legislation makes the system safer and fairer by addressing financial abuse and ensuring children receive owed support. Belyea noted that the reforms are informed by discussions with local organisations and parents who have navigated the system. Belyea emphasised that timely and full child support payments contribute to economic security and stability for families.