You might remember that back in February we shared the news that the Ombudsman had announced it would investigate the Targeted Compliance Framework.
The announcement came on the heels of the revelation that every three months, one in three working age Australians who are dependent on the government for an income (JobSeeker, Parenting Payment etc), are having their pay suspended.
In December 2024, it was revealed that around 1,000 income support payments may have been illegally cancelled in the period between April 2022 and July 2024. And since then, another 1,000+ people have had wrongful financial penalties applied to them in a separate IT issue uncovered in January 2024.
The Targeted Compliance Framework (TCF) is a Services Australia tool which administers penalties to people on government incomes if the person doesn’t meet their mutual obligations. For years, we have seen payments to single mothers suspended when they did nothing wrong. One such case is a mum who spent the night in the hospital with a child desperately ill, and then had her pay suspended the next day.
The framework itself is unjust and the IT system and Job Provider networks that makes it operate are frequently at fault. CSMC, along with many others, has been consistently opposed to the TCF and how it operates, and has told governments about the harm it does. For example, if you have your rent on direct debit and your payment is suspended, the rent payment will not be made.
Now, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Iain Anderson, has announced he is expanding his investigation beyond the TCF.
“I commenced an investigation on 4 February 2025 into the Targeted Compliance Framework (TCF) to examine if income support payment cancellation decisions were being made and implemented in a manner that is lawful, fair and reasonable,” he said. “Following my office’s review of information from relevant agencies, I have decided to expand the scope of the investigation.”
What began as a narrow inquiry into how payment cancellations were being handled has now broadened, hinting at deeper, systemic failures in how welfare compliance decisions are made.
Although the Ombudsman’s update was brief, the implications could be far-reaching. After years of quietly malfunctioning behind the scenes, the TCF—the backbone of Australia’s mutual obligation enforcement—may be nearing a major reckoning.
Underpinning the TCF is the ideology of mutual obligation—the idea that people must constantly prove they are “deserving” of help. But the framework built around that principle has grown increasingly convoluted, unaccountable, immoral and potentially unlawful.
Legal experts at Economic Justice Australia have raised concerns that core elements of the system—like the “demerit” scheme—are not actually supported by primary legislation, and therefore not subject to fair review. Providers can impose penalties without adequate oversight, and jobseekers have few formal avenues to challenge them.
CSMC and other advocates are demanding more than just fixes – we want a fundamental rethinking of the system. ACOSS and other organisations argue the TCF should be scrapped entirely, describing it as a catastrophic policy failure spanning multiple governments.
“This isn’t just a technical glitch—it’s a structural breakdown,” said ACOSS Deputy CEO Jacqueline Phillips earlier this year. “We’ve seen years of cruelty dressed up as compliance. It’s time to rebuild a system that treats people with dignity.”
With multiple investigations now underway, and the Ombudsman deepening his inquiry, the future of welfare enforcement in Australia is in question. But if recent history is any guide—from robodebt to the TCF—fixing the damage will require more than tweaks. It will demand political courage and a shift in how we think about welfare, fairness, and accountability.
