|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Australia
& South Pacific
Australian government cuts thousands of welfare recipients
off benefits
By Tania Kent
15 January 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
During the last six months of 2006, nearly 5,000 Australians
were cut off unemployment benefits for the maximum period of eight
weeks. The figure is the sharpest indication of the thrust of
the Howard governments new welfare to work system,
which began on July 1.
Since that date, according to a report in the Australian
newspaper, the number of jobless workers stripped of all income
for a two-month period has jumped by almost 250 percentfrom
3,800 over 12 months in 2004-2005 to 4,653 over six months in
2006.
Denying recipients any assistance for eight weeks is designed
to give them no choice but to accept cheap-labour work under any
conditions. People deemed to have broken so-called work test rules
three times suffer the automatic and immediate loss of payment.
Breaches can include refusing a suitable job offer,
resigning from a job without a reasonable excuse, engineering
their own dismissal and failing to participate in full-time
work for the dole activities.
Previously, those who committed such breaches were
penalised more frequentlyat an average rate of 11,000 per
month, compared to the current average of 815 per monthbut
the punishments were less severe, such as a 16 percent reduction
in income support for three months.
The new, far more draconian, system also affects single parents
and the disabled, many of whom have been placed on Newstart Allowances
(unemployment benefits), rather than Parenting Payments or Disability
Support Pensions, for the first time from July 1. Those now being
subjected to the work test include single parents
whose youngest child has turned eight, partnered parents when
their youngest child turns six, and disabled people deemed able
to work between 15 and 29 hours per week.
Taken as a whole, the Welfare to Work measures are designed
to force more than 200,000 benefit claimants into low-paid and
sub-standard work or work for the dole schemes, paving
the way for the abolition of welfare altogether.
In a revealing comment, Employment Minister Kevin Andrews said
the higher level of two-month cut-offs showed that the new system
was working efficiently. He predicted that within the next six
months, the program would meet its target of fully breaching
14,000 people. That is, the scheme was specifically designed to
reduce thousands of jobless people to a state of abject poverty.
Andrews claimed that breach penalties had been reduced overall.
But the end result has been a sharp rise in the numbers made destitute.
National Welfare Rights Network spokesman Gerard Thomas explained:
More people are being left without a cent and fewer than
expected are getting help to pay their bills. In the last year
of the old penalty system, 316 people a month lost all their Centrelink
benefits for eight weeks, while under the tough new rules the
numbers who have lost all income for eight weeks has surged to
815an increase of almost 160 per cent.
Thomas gave the example of a person suffering an undiagnosed
mental health condition. He or she could be denied payments for
eights weeks without any assistance, and there was no way for
welfare agencies to even know how frequently such things were
happening.
Demeaning and punitive measures
The Australian Federation of Homeless Organisations warned
that up to 14,000 people could become homeless as a result of
the new regime. While the government claimed it would fund a case
management program for up to 4,000 of those most at risk,
the new figures show that only 288 people out of the 4,653 cut
off were case managed.
The case management scheme is so punitive and demeaning that
some church-based charitable organisations have refused to participate.
Under the scheme, the government pays charities or welfare contractors
$650 to assess and organise the payment of essential bills for
those cut-off, supposedly to prevent them and their children from
starving, being evicted from their homes, or having their electricity,
phone or water services axed. Agencies can also make moral decisions,
such as whether funds can be used for cigarettes or contraceptives.
In addition to these measures, Family Services Minister Mal
Brough recently unveiled a planned voucher scheme to restrict
welfare benefits where the government alleges that children are
being neglected.
Up to 40 percent of payments will be denied to drug and alcohol
addicted parents, parents who allegedly gamble and parents whose
children regularly skip school. Instead they will receive vouchers
that can be used only on food, rent, clothing and essential bills.
Brough said discussions with retailers and software companies
had come up with a plan to issue a debit card that could not be
used to buy certain items such as junk food or cigarettes.
This system will lead to discrimination and public humiliation,
with those on vouchers assumed to be neglectful or drug-addicted.
The federal Liberal-National government is also counting on the
state Labor governments, whose participation is needed to implement
the program.
Charitable and welfare organisations have criticised the measure.
St Vincent de Paul national council CEO John Falzon said: You
dont help children by making their parents feel like third-class
citizens. You dont help children by using their income security
as a bargaining chip.
National Council of Women and Children convenor Elspeth McInnes
said: Punitive responses to people with addictions tend
to push them away from getting help and drive problems further
underground, but of course they cant even begin to get effective
help if the services arent there in the first place.
Apart from penalising its victims, the government is trying
to divert attention away from the social impact of its own policies,
which have impoverished wide layers of society and destroyed the
limited support programs that used to exist for those with addictions.
Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) statistics show
that the average waiting period for drug and alcohol rehabilitation
programs was 12 months last year.
Widespread financial stress
After two decades of economic restructuring, hundreds
of thousands of Australian families are living on the edge. Wesley
Mission released a report late last year which estimated that
more than one in seven families in western Sydney was on the brink
of insolvency. Forty percent did not have enough savings to meet
an unexpected $2,000 expense and one in three was anxious about
their ability to meet expenses in 2007.
Even more people58 percent of the citys populationsaid
financial stress had had an impact on themselves, their family
or the broader community. Just over 80 percent reported facing
some level of financial stress over the past six years.
In November, the police-state aspect of the welfare-to-work
program was highlighted when the government announced it would
give Centrelink (the welfare and benefits agency) powers to raid
the homes and seize the property of single parents and aged pensioners
suspected of living in unreported marriage-like relationships.
People on benefits lose about $130 per week in payments and
rent assistance if they declare they are living as a couple. Under
the proposed measures, Centrelink will be able to apply to a magistrate
for warrants to raid homes. The current procedures require Australian
Federal Police officers to be present.
Warrants can be obtained on the most spurious grounds and Centrelink
is notorious for its lack of consideration of claimants
privacy. It reported recently that 585 staff members had been
sanctioned for unlawfully obtaining information about claimants,
and 19 staff had been dismissed and another 92 had resigned as
a result of investigations.
The Welfare Rights Network said house raids were highly
sensitive, personal, intrusive and largely subjective. It
noted that Centrelink had a history of errors, with the National
Audit Office finding faults with 45 percent of randomly selected
records. The likelihood of claimants falsely being denied benefits,
accused unfairly of cohabitating or identified as neglectful parents
is extremely high.
This relentless assault on the most vulnerable sections of
society has proceeded without a murmur of opposition from the
official political establishment. In fact, the groundwork for
it was laid by the Labor Party during its 13 years in office between
1983 and 1996. It is therefore not surprising that Labor has dropped
its previous criticisms about sole parents and the disabled being
incorporated into the new regime.
Labors spokesman, Chris Evans, said aspects of the voucher
plan would not work because while this may be
part of an answer, its not really going to the major causes
of the families problems. But he failed to provide
any explanation himself of the causes of these problems, or any
policies to address them.
See Also:
Australian charities
boycott welfare to work measures
[2 October 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |