Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025; Second Reading

Thorpe criticised the government for bypassing the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights and introducing the schedule without scrutiny. Thorpe argued the measure expanded police powers inappropriately and violated international human rights instruments, including the presumption of innocence. Thorpe warned that cancelling payments would harm innocent families, increase homelessness, and disproportionately affect First Nations women and victims of domestic violence. Thorpe moved an amendment to remove Schedule 5 from the bill, aligning with calls from over 100 organisations.

Allman-Payne supported the motion to split the bill, questioning the urgency claimed by the government for bypassing inquiry. Allman-Payne cited concerns from academic and legal experts that the schedule violated due process and lacked procedural safeguards. Allman-Payne argued that the measure punished people on income support without evidence of effectiveness and created an unacceptable precedent. Allman-Payne urged the Senate to subject the schedule to scrutiny to determine its lawfulness and impact on vulnerable populations.

Tyrrell argued that the government had denied genuine consultation and undermined the rule of law by adding Schedule 5 after committee review. Tyrrell highlighted that the power allowed benefit stripping without conviction, eroding the presumption of innocence and procedural fairness. Tyrrell warned of unintended consequences, including increased homelessness and risks to family safety, particularly for First Nations people and domestic violence victims. Tyrrell supported splitting the schedule for proper public scrutiny by a parliamentary committee.