Christian Porter outlines budget’s welfare changes, saying ‘any job is better than unemployment benefits’

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

The social services minister, Christian Porter, has warned welfare recipients that “any job is better than unemployment benefits” while outlining plans to cut off four weeks of payments to those who turn down suitable work.

Tuesday’s budget contained significant changes to the way the government treats welfare recipients who fail to comply with their jobseeking requirements.

The new “demerit point” system appears to be more forgiving to welfare recipients for minor breaches – missing appointments with job service providers, for example – but harsher on the small number of recipients who turn down a suitable job or fail to attend job interviews.

When I heard about welfare drug testing, I thought of a young mother I once treated | Richard Di Natale Read more

Welfare recipients who knock back suitable work will now face the automatic loss of four weeks of payments, and will need to reapply to reactivate their payments.

Porter was asked on Thursday what he thought constituted a “suitable job”, and whether, for example, aeronautical engineers would need to take jobs in cafes to avoid punishment.



Porter said that any job was better than welfare.



“This notion that there’s a perfect, or better or worse job, is not one that we accept,” he said. “In my area, for instance the NDIS, over the next two years 60,000 jobs will be created in disability care. These are well-paid jobs, they are meaningful jobs.”

Traditionally, very few jobseekers actually turn down suitable jobs.

In 2015-16, just 589 of the 880,606 jobseekers in Australia were punished for failing to accept a suitable job, according to Department of Employment data. Social security law sets out which jobs are deemed suitable for a particular person, and which are not.

Jobs are considered unsuitable if they do not match the person’s skills, experience or qualifications, or if they would aggravate a pre-existing illness or disability, involve health and safety risks, prevent caring for children or require an “unreasonably difficult” commute.

The Australian Council of Social Services chief executive, Cassandra Goldie, urged the government to recognise that forcing people into unsuitable jobs was not effective or fair.

“What is the point of a person being forced into taking a job and then losing it because it is totally unsuitable? This is unhelpful for both the person and the employer,” Goldie said.



“Being on $38 a day is not a lifestyle choice. If people have a legitimate reason to turn down an unsuitable job, they shouldn’t be cut off,” she said.

The man who headed up the last review of the welfare compliance regime in 2010, Julian Disney, said it was crucial that decisions about whether to cancel a jobseeker’s payments were made by more senior members of Centrelink, and only after a comprehensive assessment of the person’s circumstances.

He warned against making “half-baked” judgments on whether a jobseeker had turned down a suitable job.

“Too often it just harasses the innocent and doesn’t stop the guilty,” Disney said.

“When you do it, do it thoroughly. Do not do it just in a one-size-fits-all approach.

“It’s an enormously subjective judgment, it’s one that has to be made unfortunately, that’s unavoidable, but it has to be done thoroughly.”



In explaining the changes on Thursday, the human services minister, Alan Tudge, said the demerits scheme allowed jobseekers a number of chances to comply with their requirements, before docking their pay.

Scott Morrison says sewage will be tested to find areas of high drug use for welfare trial Read more

One demerit point is accrued each time a recipient fails to go to an appointment, undertake a job search or enter a job plan.

Three demerit points in six months will trigger an interview with the recipient’s job service provider and a fourth will trigger a full Centrelink assessment – measures designed to intervene earlier without docking someone’s welfare.

The next two failures will cause a recipient to lose one week and two weeks of payments respectively. The next failure will cause the cancellation of their welfare payments for four weeks, at which point they can reapply.

“You do get a few chances [under the demerits scheme], and then after that there are consequences,” Tudge said.

“There’s one exception to that though, and that is if you fail to take a job that is suitable for you, then you will have your payment cancelled,”