In reality, this review is likely to be used by Tony Abbott as an excuse to make further deep cuts and 'reforms' to income support, just as the first McClure review was used by the Howard Government as excuse to bring in mutual obligation, including policies like welfare to work and cuts to single parents.
I might have more faith in the process if it wasn't based on the same rhetoric we heard from the Howard Government, and if the previous 'reforms' weren't still hurting people today.
This process would also be more credible if the Government wasn't talking about ending the age of entitlement while still pouring billions of dollars of subsidies into big business, and if they weren't enabling some media outlets to denigrate people with disabilities as this interim review was being released.
The Government has form when it comes to cruel, unfair policies that disproportionately affect vulnerable people. Their recent budget seeks to cut pensions, remove important supports from single parents and families and even goes as far as dropping people off income support for more than six months at a time.
Punishing people by removing or reducing access to income support makes it harder for them to find work
While the interim review acknowledges the existing payment gap between pensions and allowances, there are concerns that the Government will address this by further reducing higher payments, following on from the cuts to indexation for pensions in the recent budget, which will result in pensioners losing up to $100 per week in real terms within a decade.
The budget lacks any hint of fairness, and so it is disturbing that fairness is not one of the four pillars on which the McClure review is based. Our system should be fair as well as 'simpler and sustainable'.
The budget makes it clear that the Government engaged in an ideological campaign, as they seek to use top-down compliance measures to deliver social change and address social problems, similar to the approach taken in the Northern Territory Intervention, where we've seen that this does not work.
Punishing people by removing or reducing access to income support makes it harder for them to find work, and compounds the existing barriers to work that many people, including parents, carers, people with disability, older Australians and the long term unemployed are already facing.
Approach to NDIS
There is a real lack of understanding from the Government when it comes to lives of many people on income support, and this is also reflected in the interim review, especially when it comes to carers or people with disability and carers and the approach taken to the NDIS.
The review looks set to give the Government the opportunity drop more people from DSP onto Newstart, a move that force them to live on up to $160 less per week, and to introduce work requirements to carers.
Drawing the NDIS into this discussion is a concern, as it is not intended to pay for daily living expenses and will not reduce the increasing demand for carers in our society.
Moving back to the bad old days of people have to decide whether to spend their money on care and support or their daily living expenses would totally undermine the spirit in which the NDIS was designed.
As we said at the time of the budget, thanks to this Government, the unfortunate have become the undeserving. The Government has no understanding of the impacts of poverty or its causes and they're determined to punish anyone who is so unfortunate as to find themselves in need of help.
Income management
Income management is a prime example of this, and I shouldn't be surprised that the McClure review opens the door to an expansion of this scheme, given the ideological commitment that Government has to this approach.
Income management builds and entrenches dependency. We've seen a large number of people affected by this regime in the Northern Territory, but very few move off it, and people continue to live in poverty. There's little evidence to suggest this approach works, it costs an enormous amount, there are better ways to spend the money spent on income management on other approaches.
We need more evidence to justify this regime than the Minister's belief that income management works. The patch-work assessments undertaken to date do not justify an expansion, especially in regards to the unfairness and inequity people on the scheme experience, or the lack of transition off income support.
This is simply another way for Government to punish people and dress it up as if they're providing support.
It has taken months for this review to finally be released, but the Government is only providing the opportunity for a six week consultation process. These are significant changes to our social security system and there needs to be proper consultation, but the Government is not allowing this to take place.
This is one of the main reasons I moved for a Senate Inquiry into growing Inequality in Australia, a move supported by the Senate. Our inquiry will provide the opportunity for the entire community to better engage in this debate.
Proper public consultation around reforms to our income support system is essential. Without it, we run the risk of the Government's cruel, ideological policy increasing inequality across our community.
Share
