Welfare appeals and the ARC report to SSAT or not to SSAT: Is that the question?
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Carney, TerryAbstract
An Australian Administrative Review Council (ARC) report proposes that two-tier external merits review of social security appeals be reduced to a single tier of review (by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal). At the same time, income security payments for people of workforce age ...
See moreAn Australian Administrative Review Council (ARC) report proposes that two-tier external merits review of social security appeals be reduced to a single tier of review (by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal). At the same time, income security payments for people of workforce age have been transformed from a status entitlement, into a form of contractual bargain (under "casemanagement"). This article reviews the performance of the two-tier appeal system against its British and other counterparts, and finds that it achieves best practice. It is argued that more radical reforms canvassed in a July 1996 British Green Paper are poorly conceived, and risk compromising the principle of external review of administrative action. Single tier review may also be inappropriate. On the other hand, the challenge posed by "contractual welfare" may lend support to ARC proposals to extend alternative dispute resolution avenues, though adjudication is to be preferred for review of traditional (non-contractual) forms of welfare provision.
See less
See moreAn Australian Administrative Review Council (ARC) report proposes that two-tier external merits review of social security appeals be reduced to a single tier of review (by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal). At the same time, income security payments for people of workforce age have been transformed from a status entitlement, into a form of contractual bargain (under "casemanagement"). This article reviews the performance of the two-tier appeal system against its British and other counterparts, and finds that it achieves best practice. It is argued that more radical reforms canvassed in a July 1996 British Green Paper are poorly conceived, and risk compromising the principle of external review of administrative action. Single tier review may also be inappropriate. On the other hand, the challenge posed by "contractual welfare" may lend support to ARC proposals to extend alternative dispute resolution avenues, though adjudication is to be preferred for review of traditional (non-contractual) forms of welfare provision.
See less
Date
1996Source title
Australian Journal of Administrative LawVolume
4Issue
1Publisher
Thomson ReutersLicence
Copyright All Rights ReservedRights statement
This article was published by Thomson Reuters and should be cited as: Carney, T. (1996). Welfare appeals and the ARC report to SSAT or not to SSAT : Is that the question? Australian Journal of Administrative Law, 4(1), 25–36. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.auFaculty/School
The University of Sydney Law SchoolShare