Majetic and Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations

[2007] AATA 2093

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2007] AATA 2093

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No 2007/3602

GENERAL  ADMINISTRATIVE  DIVISION		)
Re		GORDANA MAJETIC

Applicant

And SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS  

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Dr Gordon Hughes, Member

Date21 December 2007

PlaceMelbourne

Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision under review

(sgd) Dr Gordon Hughes

Member

SOCIAL SECURITY – Pensioner education supplement – Applicant engaged in short courses associated with church and community work – whether an approved course of education

Social Security Act 1991 s 1061PA, s 1061PB, s 1061PC

Student Assistance Act 1973 s 5D

Determination of Education Institutions and Courses under subsections 3(1) and 5D(1) No. 2002/1

REASONS FOR DECISION

21 December 2007 Dr Gordon Hughes, Member         

1.      This matter involved an application for review of a decision by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) on 11 July 2007 which affirmed the decision of a Centrelink authorised review officer (ARO) to reject the Applicant's claim for payment of the pensioner education supplement.  Centrelink is the service delivery agency for the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (as it then was).

2.      The principal issue for determination by the Tribunal was whether the Applicant had been undertaking an approved course at the time of her claim for pensioner education supplement.

BACKGROUND

3.      The Applicant made a claim for pensioner education supplement on 21 November 2006.  On 29 November 2006 a Centrelink delegate rejected the claim on the basis that the Applicant was not undertaking an approved course.  On 29 December 2006, the original decision-maker advised the Applicant that the decision had been reviewed at her request and would not be changed.  On 2 March 2007 a Centrelink ARO wrote to the Applicant, advising that the decision had been affirmed.  The Applicant sought review of the decision by the SSAT and on 11 July 2007 the SSAT also affirmed the decision.

LEGISLATION

4. Section 1061PA of the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act) provides as follows:

A person is qualified for a pensioner education supplement if the person:

(a)       is undertaking qualifying study (see Subdivision B); and

(b)       is receiving a payment attracting pensioner education supplement (see Subdivision C); and

(c)       is of pensioner education supplement age (see Subdivision D); and

(d)       meets the residency requirements under Subdivision E.

Note:Division 2 sets out situations in which pensioner education supplement is not payable even if the person qualifies for it.

5.        In relation to the requirement to undertake qualifying study, section 1061PB(1) provides:

1061PB(1)For the purposes of this Part, a person is undertaking qualifying study if the Secretary is satisfied that:

(a)the person:

(i)     is enrolled in a course of education at an educational institution; or

(ii)     was enrolled in the course and satisfies the Secretary that he or she intends, and has (since no longer being enrolled) always intended, to re-enrol in the course when re-enrolments in the course are next accepted; or

(iii)     was enrolled in the course and satisfies the Secretary that he or she intends, and has (since no longer being enrolled) always intended, to enrol in another course of education (at the same or a different educational institution) when enrolments in the other course are next accepted; and

(b)the course in which the person is enrolled, or intends to enrol, is an approved course of education or study (see section 1061PC); and

(c)the person is a full-time student or a concessional study-load student in respect of that course (see sections 1061PD and 1061PE); and

(d)the person satisfies the progress rules (see sections 1061PH and 1061PI).

6.For the purposes of section 1061PB(1)(b), section 1061PC provides:

1061PCFor the purposes of paragraph 1061PB(1)(b), a course is an approved course of education or study if it is a course determined, under section 5D of the Student Assistance Act 1973, to be a secondary course of a tertiary course for the purposes of that Act.

7. With respect to the reference in s 1061PC to a determination under the Student Assistance Act 1973 (the SA Act), the Minister has issued a determination in the form of Disallowable Instrument No 2002/1 (the Determination) as to what amounts to a secondary course and a tertiary course for the purposes of the SA Act.

8.        Schedule 1 to the Determination describes secondary courses as comprising an accredited secondary course, an ESL (English as a Second Language) course, a preparatory course leading to an accredited secondary course qualification or a school-based apprenticeship or traineeship, conducted variously at either a secondary school, a registered training organisation, a higher education institution or a special school.

9.        Schedule 2 to the Determination defines a tertiary course as comprising a pre-vocational course, an ESL course, a combined vocational education and training course, under-graduate or post-graduate accredited higher education courses, open learning, a combined higher education and vocational education and training course or an integrated undergraduate/post graduate course leading to a Master’s degree, conducted variously at a registered training organisation, higher education institution or (in the case of ESL courses) other approved body.

DECISION

10.      The Applicant told the Tribunal that she had been involved in a range of church and community programs.  It was clear to the Tribunal that the Applicant was deeply committed to her voluntary work.  She produced a letter from John McLerie, Community Pastor at Careforce Church in Mt Evelyn, who referred to the activities in which the Applicant had been involved at that church.  His letter included the following overview:

…

I have known Gordana for ~ 2 years and have observed the many areas of study and learning she has undertaken at our church.

This was done mainly in the form of short courses that are run periodically throughout the year. As outlined in an earlier letter she has undertaken specific studies in Pathways 2 (an 8 unit course prior to church membership).

She has also completed Pathways 3 (an extensive short course to understand your gifts and service in the church).

She attends a weekly bible study group called "Bible Alive" which entails a meeting commitment of 2 hours, plus several hours in pre study of the set material.

She has received training in a discipleship program called T3 which will see her involved in a weekly small group commitment. …

The earlier letter referred to above was not produced in evidence, although nothing turns on the fact.

11.      The Tribunal reviewed various certificates acquired by the Applicant, over a period of time from a variety of sources.  These included a Certificate of Partnership issued by Careforce Church Mt Evelyn on 23 October 2005, a Certificate in Information Technology from Morrison House Inc Adult Education and Childcare Services, a Certificate of Participation from the Salvation Army Ringwood Corps, a Certificate of Completion of a 10 week course signed by the Leaders of the Mooroolbark Doctors Alpha Course and a Certificate of Completion in relation to a Christadelphian Bible Course.  The Tribunal also reviewed correspondence from the Careforce Church, the Salvation Army Ringwood and from the Urbanlife Soup Kitchen, variously confirming the Applicant's involvement in short courses of study, church activity or other community work.

12.      The Applicant provided the Tribunal with no evidence of an involvement in any other courses of study.

13.      The short courses undertaken by the Applicant with her church are unquestionably meritorious and no doubt facilitate the good work she is able to perform in the community.  Unfortunately for the Applicant, however, none of the courses of study outlined satisfy the description in the Act of an approved course of education at an educational institution.  It follows that she is not qualified for pensioner education supplement.

14.      For the above reasons, the Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

I certify that the fourteen [14] preceding paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of

Dr Gordon Hughes, Member

Signed:         Mara Putnis     

Clerk

Date of Hearing  22 November 2007
Date of Decision  21 December 2007
Advocate for the Applicant          self-represented
Advocate for the Respondent       Mr F. Bakhtiar, Centrelink Legal Services Branch