Act of Grace Scheme: special circumstances & the justice threshold

The Scheme

The Commonwealth’s Act of Grace Payments Scheme is one of the most unusual instruments in Australian public administration.

• It is not a court remedy.
• It is not a compensation entitlement.
• It is not even, strictly speaking, a rights-based scheme at all.

And yet, when lawful systems reach their limit — when no tribunal, statute, review pathway, or settlement mechanism can deliver an outcome that feels just — the Act of Grace Scheme remains as a residual ethical power: a discretionary capacity of government to provide payment “as a matter of grace.”

In this session of TalkAbout from Post-Law Peacemaking, we explore what happens when justice becomes discretionary — and what that means for people seeking recognition, redress, or relational repair from the state.

In this TalkAbout, we will discuss

• How does a person actually access the Act of Grace Scheme? What is the process, and who decides?
• What does the scheme cover — and what does it exclude? What kinds of situations are even considered “appropriate”?
• Why are Act of Grace claims so rarely successful? What structural, evidentiary, and institutional factors shape the outcome?
• Can decisions be challenged or reviewed? If so, through what mechanisms — and with what limits?
• How does Act of Grace differ from the CDDA Scheme? Especially given that it does not require proof of defective administration or detriment.
• What kind of justice is being served here? Is this mercy? Governance? Repair? Political discretion? Or something else entirely?

A companion conversation in relational justice

Act of Grace sits beside the Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) scheme — but it changes the conflict dynamics in subtle ways.

Without the requirement to prove administrative defect, the question shifts:

If the Commonwealth has done nothing wrong, what does it mean to ask it to make things right?

Who this session is for

This TalkAbout is designed for:

• advocates (lay and professional) navigating discretionary schemes
• public sector decision-makers and integrity professionals
• lawyers, mediators, and ombudsman-adjacent practitioners
• governance and policy thinkers concerned with administrative justice
• anyone working at the intersection of conflict, care, and the state

No prior expertise is required — only a willingness to think carefully about what justice means when law runs out.