Late last month, the Auditor-General tabled a comprehensive performance audit of the administration of the age pension in Australia to Parliament. One year earlier, AAWAA was invited to submit detailed evidence to the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) documenting the systemic barriers older women face when seeking to access this critical income support.
Now, we can report that every concern we raised has been validated by the ANAO’s findings. But perhaps what is most shocking is that despite women constituting 55.55 per cent of all recipients, neither Services Australia nor the audit analyse whether sex matters to outcomes — whether women wait longer, are paid less accurately, or face harsher treatment.
Women’s encounters with Services Australia
A year ago, AAWAA submitted evidence to the ANAO: we presented accounts of women whose encounters with Services Australia exposed systematic problems.
June spent two years resolving errors in her husband’s residential care fee calculations. Despite submitting required documentation repeatedly, she faced continuous requests for the same information. Poor coordination meant June’s issue dragged on nearly two years.
Kaye discovered a $13,500 overpayment after her husband’s death — caused by Services Australia’s failure to maintain proper records of her superannuation income. Yet Kaye faced unexpected debt, a $700 fortnightly pension reduction, and months of delays awaiting repayment instructions.
Cynthia waited six months for age pension approval. Only after contacting her federal MP did things move. During this wait, Cynthia was subjected to intrusive questioning about how she had spent her savings.
Kelly had her pension cancelled over Christmas when a superannuation statement was rejected without notification. It took three months to resume payments, with only partial backdating.
Paula found the online application process unmanageable. She made a three-hour round trip to a regional centre to meet with an official in person. Only face-to-face assistance enabled her to access the pension.
These were not isolated incidents. They were patterns: women being dismissed, delayed, doubted, and subjected to greater scrutiny.
The audit confirms every concern
The ANAO’s findings validate what these women reported to us. Between July 2021 and June 2024, process deficiencies led to an estimated $5 billion in incorrect payments — including $1.33 billion in underpayments and $3.67 billion in overpayments.
Services Australia’s superannuation assessment error remained unresolved for over a decade, affecting 175,032 recipients since 2010 with $37 million in overpayments. 29.82 per cent of sampled recipients were paid incorrectly. The maximum processing time was 1,527 calendar days — 4.2 years.
Only 48.55 per cent of phone calls were answered. Maximum wait times exceeded one hour on 435 days — 57.31 per cent of all days. 34 per cent of Australians aged 50+ have low digital literacy, yet Services Australia prioritises digital engagement.
How the system fails women differently
These patterns do not affect all recipients equally. We know that in society in general, women are dismissed more readily, doubted more frequently, subjected to greater scrutiny.
Cynthia was subjected to intrusive questions about her spending, a level of scrutiny unlikely directed at male applicants. June faced two years of repeated requests for identical documentation, poor coordination that would likely have been resolved more swiftly for a male client. Kaye was penalised with $13,500 debt for the department’s record-keeping failure, a burden a man might have been spared.
These accounts suggest women face greater scrutiny and less favourable treatment; yet without sex-disaggregated data, these patterns remain unmeasured. Women are not just experiencing system failures: we are experiencing failures compounded by assumptions about our credibility and entitlement.
If failures were distributed equally, approximately 442,284 women would have been paid incorrectly. But administrative bias is not evenly distributed. The audit’s figures represent system-wide failure. But women bear the heavier burden.
Yet we remain invisible
Despite women constituting 55.55 per cent of all recipients, the audit contains:
- No sex-disaggregated analysis of payment accuracy rates
- No sex-disaggregated breakdown of processing times or service quality
- No examination of whether system failures affect women differently
- All recommendations are ‘gender-neutral’
The audit acknowledges widow-specific residence exemptions that once existed — evidence that policymakers recognised women’s distinct circumstances. Yet current administration treats ‘older Australians’ as homogeneous.
The absence of sex-disaggregated analysis is not a neutral oversight. It is a decision that renders women’s distinct experiences invisible. Without data on whether women wait longer, are paid less accurately, or face harsher scrutiny, sex-based patterns of harm remain unaddressed. And reform will continue to assume a ‘gender-neutral’ recipient who does not exist.
What must change
The Department of Social Services agreed or agreed in principle to all recommendations. Services Australia and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs agreed to all recommendations directed to them. But effective implementation requires recognising that women are the majority affected, and that we do not experience these failures equally. The following needs to happen.
- Sex-disaggregated data collection must be mandatory. All performance measures must report results by sex. This is the only way to identify whether women and men are treated differently.
- Systems must be designed for women’s actual circumstances, not retrofitted around us. Interrupted employment, complex residency histories, and lower superannuation balances all impact women’s retirement circumstances.
- Face-to-face support is essential. Digital-first service delivery excludes the people who often need support most.
- Evaluate reforms through a sex-based lens. Reducing average processing times means nothing if women’s cases continue to take longer. Improving payment accuracy means nothing if women remain more likely to face debt recovery for system errors.
Women’s circumstances are the nation’s challenge
One year ago, we told the ANAO that women constitute a vulnerable category when it comes to the administration and provision of the age pension. The audit has confirmed the system is broken. But it has not asked whether the system breaks differently for women. The Auditor-General has the power to request sex-disaggregated analysis of outcomes: processing times, payment accuracy, service quality, but this opportunity has not been taken in this report.
Without making women visible, reform will not serve us. Effective reform requires seeing older women not as a subset of ‘seniors’, but as the majority of recipients with distinct economic vulnerabilities and distinct encounters with administrative systems across the lifecourse. It requires understanding that June’s two years of repeated requests, Kaye’s undeserved debt, and Cynthia’s intrusive questioning are evidence of patterns that target women, and that must be measured, analysed, and addressed.
